Order No.                 .

Shri A.K. CHANDA, MEMBER.   

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

The case of the complainant in brief, is that he obtained a Mahatten Credit Card being No.4129034830805716 from OPs 3 and 4 and it is stated by the complainant that on 02-08-2012 he made two transactions of Rs.2,346/- and Rs.6,545/- from purchasers from the OP1 through his credit card from Raymond Shop ULKOLKATAIN and M/S. ARPIT KOLKATA.  But it was noticed by the complainant that a sum of Rs.6,545/- was debited twice for one transaction and he immediately brought the matter to the notice of OP1, Raymond Shop who assured to solve the same.  But ultimately nothing had been done by him.  The complainant being the credit card holder lodged a complaint to the helpline of OP3 Standard Chartered Bank and paid the credit card dues on 06-09-2012 excepting the disputed amount of Rs.6,545/- as advised by the concerned person of the credit card Section of the said Bank.  In the meantime his card No. was blocked and new No.4129034836237278 was issued for investigation of the complaint about duplicate billing which have been raised by the complainant.

          In spite of several persuasions before the OPs to make correction of the wrong entries the complainant received a letter No.1/C/2010/1227 dated 12-10-2012 from the OP Credit Card Division of Standard Chartered Bank who debited the disputed transaction without any internal verification and/or investigation of the said dispute.  Hence, this case.

          The OPs 1 and 2 did not appear and file any written version.  Hence, this case is heard ex parte against them.

          On the contrary the OPs 3 and 4 Standard Chartered Bank by filing its written version have stated that having the knowledge of the fraudulent and wrongful transaction of Rs.6,545/- as alleged by the complainant, the concerned merchant had not provided the credit for the disputed transactions during the course of investigations.  But the OPs debited the amount from the complainant’s credit card account of August 02, 2012 as per statement dated October 18, 2012.  On receipt of the credit from the merchant on November 24, 2012, these OPs credited the same to the complainant’s card account of August 02, 2012 as per the statement dated December 18, 2012.

          In view of the above, it is stated by them that there has been no deficiency on the part of the OPs 3 and 4.

          In its written version, the OP5 has stated that in the instant case, the complainant is not a consumer to the OP5.  The credit card also has not been issued by them and they are not a service provider to the complainant and there has been no privity of contract between the Axis Bank and the complainant.  Since, the complainant is a credit card holder of another Bank i.e., OP3, no complaint can lie upon them.  It is also stated by the OP5 that it is true that the complainant was charged Rs.6,545/- twice by M/s. Raymond Shop, Ultadanga for a single purchase dated 02-08-2012, the OP5 upon receipt of the compliant had taken prompt action and the transaction was reversed and money was refunded on 23-11-2012 vide Refund ARN No.74056632216000004730113. As such, the OP5 prayed before the Ld. Forum for relieving them from unnecessary harassment.

Points for Determination

Now, the question is whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

Decision with Reasons

It is alleged by the complainant that while he purchased materials from the Raymond Shop, i.e. OP1 by two transactions of Rs.2,346/- and Rs.6,545/- on 02-08-2012 through his Manhatten Credit Card No.4129034830805716, the OPs 1 and 2 charged thrice making double the transaction in respect of Rs.6,545/- against single purchase from the Raymond Shop-Kolkata what was subsequently reflected in the complainant’s credit card statement dated 19-08-2012.  It is also stated by the complainant that though he brought this anomaly to the notice of the Raymond Shop OP1 to solve the matter, but instantly no action had been taken by them.  Ultimately the complainant lodged a complaint to the OP3 Standard Chartered Credit Card Section to aware them the dispute which arises for such wrongful entry of excess charges of Rs.6,545/- from the OP1.  The main contention of the complainant is that even after communication on 27-12-2012 from its end to the OPs 1 and 2 about the wrongful transaction the OP Standard Chartered Bank Credit Card Division caused to yield Rs.1,282-88 i.e. (card replacement for Rs.200/- plus Late fee charges Rs.600/- plus Rs.350/- plus service taxes Rs.74-16 plus Rs.44-96 plus interest Rs.13-76) = Rs.1284-88 for which the complainant suffered from mental agony, harassment as a bona fide customer for such a long period of about 120 days without any fault of the card holder/petitioner.

 It is contended by the OPs 1 and 2 that though they had admitted the inconvenience and agony caused by the complainant and accordingly took up the matter with their Merchant Bank Axis Bank for refund of the said Second deduction of Rs.6,545/- but it took long time.  It is also stated that since there were three parties involved in the transaction, the buyer and the seller comprising the merchant Bank, Axis Bank and also credit card provider, Standard Chartered Bank, the process has taken tangible time for refund in the credit card account of the complainant.

We have gone through the details of the case and carefully considered the submission and perused the documents on record.  Considering the above facts and circumstances, it reveals that there was procedural lapses about the transaction made by the OPs 1 and 2 wherein double entries have been reflected instead of single item amounting to Rs.6,545/- and it took long time by the OPs to reverse the payment of wrongly entered item and for such delay the complainant had suffered mentally and physically because he had to run the offices of the OPs, lodged complaint and in the name investigation the OPs 3 and 4 issued duplicate credit card and for such process the credit card-fees and other charges were debited in his credit card account approximately Rs.1,300/- which includes (card replacement cost late fee charges service charge along with interest also) in his credit card account of OPs 3 and 4/Standard Chartered Bank.

Though subsequently, it was observed by the OP/Raymond Shop that the alleged amount of Rs.6,545/- was wrongly entered and reflected in the bill second time what they admitted but took long time/date to reverse the entry of such amount of Rs.6,545/- and to make correction, but the complainant suffered from humiliation which cannot be ignored due to fault on the part of OPs/Raymond Shop.

So, in our view the complainant had suffered mental agony and harassment for such irresponsible act on the part of OP/Raymond Shop.

But the primary responsibility is of two OPs only i.e. OPs 1 and 2 for whose wrong transaction amounting to Rs.6,545/- in connection with the purchase bill though the anomaly was brought to the notice and M/s. Arpit who in spite of giving assurances to resolve the anomaly, did not process the transaction on behalf of the said Raymond shop i.e. OPs 1 and 2 without paying any heed in respect of wrongful transaction (double) in due course of time, but after filing of this complaint in this Forum for which it attracts deficiency of services/unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs1 and 2 which defined u/s.2(1)(g) and (r) of the C.P. Act, 1986, and the complainant had to rush before the Ld. Forum as a last resort for redressal of his grievance.  It also caused mental agony and harassment for which the complainant be compensated to the tune of Rs.2,000/- by the OPs 1 and 2 with also litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to be paid by the OPs 1 and 2.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed ex parte with cost against OPs 1 and 2 and dismissed against OPs 3 to 5.

          The OPs 1 and 2 are jointly and severally are directed to pay the compensation of Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) as compensation to the complainant within a period of 30(thirty) days from the date of this order failing which penal action shall be initiated against them.

          There shall be an order of litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-(Rupees One thousand only) to be paid by the OPs 1 and 2 to the complainant. 

          In the event of non-compliance of any portion of the order by the concerned OPs 1 and 2 within a period of 30(thirty) days from the date of this order, failing which OPs1 and 2 shall have to pay punitive damages at the rate of Rs.100/- per day till full satisfaction but said amount if collected shall be deposited to the State Consumer Welfare Fund and even then for repeated violation of Forum’s order, penal proceeding shall be started u/s.27 of the C.P. Act, even for implementation they may be sent to jail.