DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016
Case No.1106/2007
Smt. Mona Dutta
W/o Shri Ashwani Dutta,
R/o 30/23, East Patel nagar,
New Delhi-110008. ….Complainant
Versus
S.B.I. Card & Payments Pvt. Ltd.
Having its Registered Office at
11, Parliament Street
New Delhi-110001. ….Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 09.10.2017
Date of Order : 26.10.2018
Coram:
Sh. R.S. Bagri, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
ORDER
Naina Bakshi, Member
The case of the complainant in nutshell is that the representative of the OP started enquiring about the details of the complainant and her family members. In good faith, the complainant had given the details of her family members to the representative of the OP. The complainant never asked to sign any document nor the complainant had ever signed any document. The complaint had never requested the OP to issue any credit card to the complainant nor the complainant needs any such credit card. It is submitted that after few days, the complainant received two credit cards bearing no. 4317 5757 0551 6889 in the name of complainant and another credit card bearing No. 4317 5757 0551 6897 in the name of complainant’s husband. The complainant had never requested the OP for issuance of any credit card either in her name or in the name of her husband nor the complainant or husband of the complainant had ever signed any form for issuance of credit card. The complainant was shocked and surprised to receive some format of the policy form of M/s Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. whereas the complainant had never asked for any policy for hearth or had also never asked for any credit card from the OP. It is submitted that the complainant had never used the said card of at any point of time and the husband of the complainant had never used the said credit card. It is submitted that neither the complainant nor complainant’s husband took the alleged Insurance policy, format of which has been sent by the OP. Complainant received a statement of account in respect of credit card of the complainant in January, 2007. After the receipt of the statement of account, the complainant contacted the officials of the OP, that the complainant had never used the said credit card and complainant not liable to make any payment to the OP. Complainant received a legal notice dated 09.02.2007 from Shri Rajiv Aggarwal Advocate, whereby the OP threatened to initiate legal proceedings in the court. In the legal notice, the OP demanding an amount of Rs.9,667.43p. Immediately, the complainant contacted the representative of the OP and explained him the position that the complainant had never used the credit card and complainant was not liable to pay any amount. Complainant was under the impression that the OP had infact withdrawn the said notice. But again OP sent a statement of account in the month of March, 2007 for an amount of Rs.10,123.81p whereas the earlier statement of account and in the legal notice, OP had demanding sum of Rs.9667.43p. The complainant did not make any payment to the OP but the representative of the OP started harassing the complainant by making phone calls and on receiving the threatening calls, the complainant became frightened. The OP had issued a letter dated 10.03.2007 by which the OP had agreed to take a sum of Rs.3,000/- in full and final settlement. The representative of the OP called the complainant and suggested that if a total amount of Rs.3,000/- is paid by the complainant, then the entire dues will be cleared. Though, the complainant was not liable to make any payment to the OP, but in order to get rid of the aforesaid threatening calls the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.3,000/- to the OP. The OP issued a receipt dated 11.03.2007 toward full and final settlement but after making the said payment of Rs.3,000/-. The complainant again in the month of April, 2007 received another statement of account from OP demanding a sum of Rs.7,660.64p. In that statement, it was shown that only part payment of Rs.3,000/- was paid to the OP where the sum of Rs.3,000/- was paid to the OP toward full and final settlement. The OP again in the month of May, 2007 demanding Rs.8149.99p. It is submitted that the OP has no right to take any amount from the complainant. On the other hand, the OP is liable to refund the amount which they had already received from the complainant by using coercive method. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 22.05.2007 to the OP but OP did not give any reply thereof. Since the OP had not withdrawn the statement of account dated 06.05.2007 till date despite requests of the complainant. The complainant filed a Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5838/2007 before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and Hon’ble High Court given liberty to the complainant to approach the appropriate Forum. Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of the OP, complainant has filed the present complaint for issuing following directions to the OP:-
- to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant as the OP has caused harassment, tension and torture to the complainant, apart from refunding the amount of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant which the OP has already received from the complainant by using force and other coercive methods and
- to quash the statement of account dated 06.05.2007 for Rs.8,149.99 or any other statement of account and this Hon’ble Forum be also pleased to declare that the OP is not entitled to receive any amount from the complainant.
OP in the reply has inter-alia stated that the complainant approached the OP with an application for credit card form. The complainant was requested to furnish certain documents for verification. The complainant furnished the documents requested for and the OP after due verification issued Credit card with certain terms and conditions, which were duly accepted by the complainant. According to the terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the complainant, the holder of the credit card who makes payments for purchases or withdraws cash using the card, should pay the amount drawn or spent upon receipt of the bill / statement. A 15 grace period is provided for payment of the amount due, if the card holder pays the amount with in the due date, no interest is levied. It is submitted that in case the card holder pays only the minimum amount due on the bill and opts for the flexi plan, OP will charge finance charges for all purchases made after the card holder exercise the option and the card holder will not get the any free credit period. The card holder will get the 15 to 50 days free credit period for all purchases only if he clears the bill in total before the due date. It is submitted that SBI Card No. 4317 5757 0551 6889 was issued to the complainant after receiving application form for the same from the complainant. The request for the additional card in the name of Mr. Ashwani Kumar Dutta was also made by the complainant in the said application form. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant never applied for the credit card therefore the complainant is misleading the Forum, complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed on this ground only. It is submitted that the OP made a telephonic offer in the month of September, 2006 to the complainant for the Royal Sundaram Insurance Policy which was accepted by the Complainant, therefore, the OP forwarded the request of the complainant to the insurance company who in turned issued the policy in the name of complainant and OP debited the amount of the policy in the card account of the complainant. The annual fee of the card was also not paid by the complainant which was levied in the month of February, 2007 on the card and the charges of the insurance which kept attracting which the late payment charges and interest. It is submitted that the OP under special schemes sends settlement of account offers to its customers and called them to clear their accounts by paying settlement amount offered in the settlement letter against the dues on their cards. The customers are required to pay the settlement amount offered and sign the copy of the offer letter as token of their acceptance and furthermore customers are required to send a copy of settlement letter along with the proof of payments made, pursuant to the settlement offer to the OP. In this case, the complainant has failed to act according to the requirements of the offer letter and the payment made by her was considered as part payment hence her account was showing an unpaid amount. When it came to the knowledge of the OP that the complainant has paid Rs.3000/- under the settlement offer, OP reversed all the charges in the month of August, 2007 despite the fact that the complainant failed to sign the settlement offer as a token of acceptance. It is submitted that the complainant has alleged in the complaint that the OP’s people are calling for recovery of the outstanding amount and threatening her. All the allegation are wrong and false and OP has a strict code of conduct and none of employee is involved in any of such activities and failed to prove any deficiency on the part of the OP. OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Complainant has filed rejoinder to the reply of OP and reiterated the same.
Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. Ratan Sinha, Manager (Legal) has been filed in evidence on behalf of OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the file very carefully.
Admittedly the OP had issued two credit cards in the name of the complainant and her husband. As per the telephonic approval from the complainant, OP had issued insurance from Royal Sundaram Insurance Policy in the name of the complainant. The complainant filed the original visa card in the name of complaint and her husband as CW-1/1 and CW-1/2. The complainant filed the Health Shield insurance certificate as annexure CW-1/3. Mediclaim card issued by the insurance are annexures as CW1/5 and CW1/6 and CW1/7. The OP vide letter dated 09.02.2007 informed the complainant regarding outstanding amount of RS.9667.43/- as annexure CW-1/9. The OP issued a monthly statement dated 06.03.2007 as annexure CW-1/10. The OP vide letter dated 10.03.2007 issued to the complainant regarding settlement as CW-1/11. The OP vide receipt no. 11.3.2007 issued to the complainant as a full and final payment receipt as CW-1/12. The OP issued a monthly statement dated 06.05.2007 for an amount of Rs.8149.99 as annexure CW1/13. The OP again issued a monthly statement 06.07.2007 for an amount of Rs.677.73/- The complainant sent a legal notice dated 22.05.2007 as annexure CW1/14. The complainant filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court as CW1/17. The OP vide order dated 06.05.2016 submitted a letter dated 02.05.2016 mentioned that account number of the complainant stands inactive for usage and there is no dues payable towards the same. We mark it as annexure-A for the purpose of identification.
In view of the above, it is clear form the documents submitted by the parties, that the complainant has paid Rs.3,000/- under the settlement scheme to the OP and the OP issued the slip to the complainant on 11.03.2017 wherein it is mentioned that full and final payment received no other dues but the OP again sent letters dated 06.05.2007 and 06.07.2007 for an amount of Rs.8149.99p. and Rs.3795.73p respectively. The OP had issued a letter dated 02.05.2016 wherein the OP had informed the complainant that SBI card numbers 0004318575705516889 and 0004317575705516897 issued towards account no. 0004317575700151203 stands inactive for usage and there is no dues payable towards the same.
The complainant filed the complaint on 09.10.2007 and the complainant paid the full and final payment on 11.03.2007 to the OP. The OP had issued a receipt to the complainant in this regard as CW-1/12 even after paying the full and final payment to the OP. The OP issued monthly statement on 06.05.2007 and 06.07.2007. It shows that the OP had not checked their account before issuing letters dated 06.05.2007 and 06.07.2007 to the complainant wherein even after issuing the receipt of full and final payment, OP issued letters for payment. It amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
In view of the above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OP to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and mental agony to the complainant
The order shall be complied within 30 days of receipt of copy of this order failing which OP shall become liable to pay interest @ Rs.6% per annum on the above said amount.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 26.10.2018.
