BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 143/2008 Filed on 28.06.2008

Dated : 15.04.2009

Complainant:

Manoharan, Manu Bhavan, Aduppukuttampara, Vazhayila, Peroorkada P.O, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. Kulathoor S.V. Premakumaran Nair)

Opposite party:

Authorized Signatory, SBI Cards, Uthradam Building, Top Floor, Rohini Tyres, Panavila Junction, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. A. Abdul Kharim & R. Ranjit)

This O.P having been heard on 01.04.2009, the Forum on 15.04.2009 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

The complainant has filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party alleging as follows: The complainant was forced to take SBI Credit card bearing No. 43175751643224181 of the opposite party. On 24.01.2007 the complainant had withdrawn Rs. 6000/- by using the card through ATM and the said amount with interest was remitted using the said card. Since the complainant wanted to cancel the said card, he had to remit Rs. 103/- for the cancellation of the SBI card and a receipt for the same was also issued. But after that the complainant has been issued with a bill for Rs. 8458.50. The complainant had already settled the amount due towards the SBI card with interest and hence this complaint.

The opposite party accepted the notice issued from the Forum and never turned up and hence they remain exparte.

The complainant has filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked Exts. P1 to P4, he has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged.

The issues that would arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to pay the amount claimed by the opposite party?

2. Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party?

3. Reliefs and costs.

Points (i) to (iii):- The statement of accounts which has been marked as Ext. P3 reveals that the complainant is the holder of the credit card bearing No. 43175751643224181. From Ext. P2 it is seen that an amount of Rs. 6,150/- has been debited from the account of the complainant on 22.02.2007 towards SBI card. The allegation of the complainant is that, inspite of remittance of the entire amount with interest he was again asked to remit Rs. 103/- towards cancellation of the said card and accordingly he had paid Rs. 103/-. Ext. P1 is the document produced in support of the same. The payment of Rs. 103/- by the complainant on 23.06.2007 in the said card No. is seen accepted by the opposite party as per the P1 receipt. The complainant has further pleaded that the opposite party's staff had endorsed and signed in the receipt that “card settle ചെയ്തു, അതിന്‍ പ്രകാരം 103/- രൂപ balance വാങ്ങിച്ചു. ഇനി അടയ്ക്കാന്‍ ഇല്ല." It is true that there is an endorsement with regard to the same in Ext. P1 which according to the complainant has been written by the opposite party's staff. But the opposite party has never turned up to deny the same or contest the matter and they have not filed their version either denying the allegations levelled against them. In such a circumstance, this Forum is left with no other option than to accept the pleadings in the complaint. The records produced by the complainant prove that the complainant has been asked to remit further amounts even after the clearance of the entire dues. When the opposite party has accepted Rs. 103/- and issued Ext. P1, it was incumbent upon the opposite party to have ensured that it was duly credited to the complainant's account. Now the opposite party has claimed Rs. 8,458.50 as per Ext. P3 and as per Ext. P4, the amount has been enhanced to Rs. 9,729.40 from the complainant, the details of which have not been provided by the opposite party. As a financial institution, duty upon the opposite party was of a higher degree of care and caution which they have failed. Having received the entire amount from the complainant, the opposite party is bound to account the same.

On the basis of the documents and affidavit, we find that the opposite party is guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

In the result, the complaint is allowed and the complainant is found not liable to remit any further amount to the opposite party. The opposite party shall stop such unfair trade practice and shall cancel the card and close the account of the complainant with immediate effect. The opposite party shall also pay an amount of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) as costs to the complainant within a period of one month failing which the above amounts shall carry interest @ 12%.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 15^th April 2009.

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

C.C. No. 143/2008

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

NIL

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Original receipt No. 8294472 dated 23.06.2007.

P2 - Copy of statement of accounts of A/c No. 57006290463.

P3 - Copy of statement of accounts dated 02.12.2007.

P4 - Copy of lawyer's notice dated 17.07.2008.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT