This complaint coming up before us for final hearing on 04-07-14                                in the presence of Smt Sk. A. Begum, advocate for complainant,                                 Sri L.V. Kumar, advocate for 1^st opposite party, claim against opposite parties 2, 3 and 5 is dismissed and 4^th opposite party remained absent and set exparte, upon perusing the material on record and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-      The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking a direction to the 1^st opposite party to reactivate his credit card, provide him the entire balance sheet of his credit card account and Rs.20,000/- as damages towards mental agony and pain together with interest @24% p.a. and for costs.

2.   In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

          The complainant is having savings account with State Bank of India, Main Branch, Guntur since long time.   On 17-01-12 the complainant made a fixed deposit of Rs.3,00,000/- for a period of three years .   The complainant obtained credit card (platinum) on his fixed deposit having credit limit of Rs.2,70,000/- and cash limit of Rs.2,70,000/-.   The complainant also obtained additional card with same credit facilities.   Any credit card holder has to pay the amount within 20 days after statement generation date.   The                          4^th opposite party informed the complainant that no interest will be levied till the expiry of 50 days on the amounts that were used through the credit card and interest will be levied at 3.33% p.m., after expiry of 50 days.   A credit card holder is paying interest on every 20 days to the bank as against the promise of 50 days, interest free period.   The complainant through his credit card on 22-05-12 purchased gold for Rs.13500/-; on 23-06-12 for Rs.10,500/- and later for Rs.95,000/-; Rs.50,000/-, Rs.54,000/-, Rs.20,000/- and on 01-11-12 for Rs.40,000/-.  As directed by the bank authorities and the messages, the complainant paid the minimum payment on 2^nd of every month from June, 2012 to November, 2012.  The complainant thus paid Rs.11,550/- on 02-06-12; Rs.13,265/- on 03-07-12; Rs.13,000/- on 02-08-12; Rs.13,220/- on 01-09-12; Rs.12,130/- on 03-10-12; Rs.11,960/- on 02-11-12.  The bank authorities never sent bills to the complainant in a written form from the date of receipt of credit card and used to send short messages.   The complainant on many occasions requested to send balance sheet of his account.   Inspite of repeated requests the opposite parties failed to send account copies.  The complainant in December, 2012 received a message to his mobile phone that his credit card was deactivated due to irregular payments.   The complainant is very regular in payment of amounts to bank as per directions given through messages.   Recently the     1^st opposite party demanded the complainant to pay Rs.2,77,000/- towards principle and interest accrued or else they will appropriate the FD money lying with it.   The opposite parties are making false promises to the public with a view to attract them in order to play fraud at a later date.   The                   1^st opposite party framed rules and regulations as per their whims and fancies against the rules of Reserve Bank of India.   On account of irresponsible attitude of the opposite parties the complainant suffered lot of mental agony and suffering.   Calculating flat rate of interest at 3.35% per month even though the complainant paid the debt in advance of stipulated period for repayment comes under the deficiency of service, cheating and misrepresentation of facts.  The complaint therefore be allowed.

3.   This Forum on 08-05-14 dismissed the complaint against the opposite parties 2, 3 and 5 for non prosecution as the complainant failed to take steps i.e., notice to correct address on 06-12-13 including substituted service (the complaint was registered on 04-03-13).

4.   The 4^th opposite party was set exparte on 28-10-13 as did not respond to the notice issued to him.

5.  The contention of the 1^st opposite party in nutshell is hereunder:

          The complainant is not a consumer within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.   This Forum is devoid of jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in view of arbitration clause mentioned in the booklet issued to the complainant.   SBI Cards and Payment Service Private Limited issued advantage card to the complainant against the FD which he had in SBI.                    As per terms and conditions M/s SBICPSL has got a right to adjust the FD amount against the outstanding due.  The complainant was indebted in a sum of Rs.2,95,137.72 ps as per statement dated 13-03-13.  Due to non receipt of payment, SBICPSL exercised its lien over the FD amount on              28-03-13.  As the complainant failed to make payment in time charges were levied as per terms and conditions.  The complainant suppressed material facts and approached this Forum with concocted facts.   The complainant is not due in any amount in respect of his credit card.  Rest of the allegations contra mentioned in the complaint are all false and concocted.  The complaint therefore be dismissed. 

6.  Exs.A-1 to A-11 on behalf of complainant and Exs.B-1 to B-14 on behalf of 1^st opposite party were marked.

7.   Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:

          1.  Whether the complainant is a consumer within the purview of the                              Consumer Protection Act?

          2. Whether this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in                      view of arbitration clause?

          3. Among the opposite parties who committed deficiency in service?

          4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get his credit card activated?

          5. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation of Rs.20,000/-                 together with interest?

          6. To what relief?

8.   Admitted facts in this complaint are these:-

          1.  The complainant is having SB account with State Bank of India,                  Commercial Branch, Kannavari Thota, Guntur (Ex.A-4).

          2. The complainant deposited Rs.3,00,000/- on 17-01-12 for a period                     of three years with the SBI, Commercial Branch,       Kannavarithota,                Guntur and it carried interest at 9.25%  (Ex.A-3).

          3. The complainant obtained credit card (platinum) from SBICPSL on               the security of his FD amount with the SBI, Commercial Branch,                      Kannavarithota, Guntur.

          4.  The complainant made purchases through credit card.

          5.  The complainant on 02-06-12 paid Rs.11,550/- under Ex.A-5=B-4;                      Rs.13,265/- on 03-07-12 under ExA-6=B5; Rs.13000/- on 02-08-12             under Ex.A-7; Rs.13,220/- on 01-09-12 under Ex.A-8=B6;                                    Rs.12130/- on 03-10-12 under ExA-9=B7; Rs.11,960/- on 02-11-12              under Ex.A10=B-8.

          6. The credit limit and cash limit provided under credit card is to                       the extent of Rs.2,70,000/- (Ex.A-1).

          7.  The complainant also obtained additional card (Ex.A-1).

9.      The complainant did not describe the main opposite party (OP1) properly.   The complainant on 08-02-13 filed this complaint describing the                       1^st opposite party as Senior Branch Manager, Credit Cards Wing, SBI Branch, Guntur.   Notice addressed to the 1^st opposite party was returned as                       “No such addressee in this office”.  The complainant through his counsel on 31-07-13 filed memo showing the address of the 1^st opposite party as                    Mr Varun Sharma, Manager, SBI Cards & Payment Services Private Limited, Flat No.103-105, 1^st & 3^rd floor, Ashoka Bhopal Chambers, S.P.Road, Secunderabad i.e., why the 1^st opposite party made appearance through advocate on 28-10-13 only.

10.  POINT No.1:-     Under Ex.B-1 the complainant charged annual fee of Rs.2,999/- and Rs.370.68 ps as GST.  Under those circumstances it can be said that SBI cards and Payment Services Private Limited is rendering services to its customers on receiving consideration.   It can therefore be said that the complainant is a consumer within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.   We therefore answer this point in favour of the complainant.

11.  POINT No.2:-    Burden is on M/s SBI cards and Payment Services Private Limited (herein after called as SBICPSL) that they have mentioned arbitration clause in the booklet supplied to the complainant.   M/s SBICPSL  is having that kit with it and for the reasons best known to it, with held from the purview of the Forum.   The relief being sought in this Forum is being additional remedy u/s 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, we are of the considered opinion that this Forum has jurisdiction to                          entertain the complaint.  For the discussion made supra, we answer this point in favour of the complainant.

12.   POINTS 3&4:-    In Ex.A-1 it was mentioned that statement will be generated on 13^th of every month.   On the reverse of Ex.A-2 it was mentioned that due date for payment is 20 days after statement generation date.   The following was mentioned in Ex.A-2:

     “Please note that SBI Cards and Payment Services Private Limited (“SBICPSL”) is incorporated as a private limited company under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956.  SBICPSL is accordingly a distinct legal entity from the State Bank of India.  SBICPSL is constituted in consequent to and by virtue of a joint venture agreement between the State Bank of India and General Electric Capital Corporation (a corporation incorporated in accordance to laws of the United States of America).  SBICPSL is responsible for issuance of SBI credit cards and for providing such related financial services and accordingly SBICPSL along with its direct affiliate(s) are alone responsible for resolving all disputes and differences in relation to SBI credit cards without reference to the State Bank of India”.

13.    State Bank of India and SBICPSL are different legal entities as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the SBICPSL.   The complainant in page 3 of his complaint mentioned the following:

          “It is submitted that the 4^th opposite party also represented that the complainant is eligible for SBI Platinum card, and it can be used for both purchases, and cash drawings.   And that no interest will be levied on the amounts that were used through the credit card till the expiry of 50 days, and after 50 days the interest will be levied at the rate of 3.33% p.m.”

14.  The above averments revealed that the complainant is aware of SBICPSL charging 3.33% p.m., if the amount was not paid within grace period of 50 days. 

a) The complainant in page 4 of his complaint mentioned the following:

“It is submitted that the complainant after receiving the platinum credit card, used it on 22-05-2012 for purchase of gold for Rs.13,500/- and later on 23-06-12 Rs.10,500/-, later Rs.95,000/-, once Rs.50,000/-, once Rs.54,000/-, once Rs.20,0-00/- like that the last lone the complainant used his credit card was or Rs.40,000/- on 01-11-12”.  

The said averments revealed that the complainant by using his credit card made purchases worth of Rs.2,83,000/- till 02-11-12 and he is aware of those  purchases.

15.    M/s SBICPSL filed duplicate copy of statements and they are marked as Exs.B-1 to B-14.   Ex.B-2 statement was for the period from 14-04-12 to 13-05-12.  Ex.B-2 further revealed that the complainant made purchases of Rs.2,04,925/- during 21-04-12 – 02-05-12.  Ex.B-3 was statement for the period from 14-05-12 to 13-06-12.   Ex.B-3 further revealed that the complainant made purchases of Rs.31528/- during 19-05-12 – 22-05-12.  Ex.B-4 was statement for the period from 14-06-12 to 13-07-12 and it revealed that the complainant purchased goods worth of Rs.12,200/-.  Ex.B-8 was the statement for the period from 14-10-12 to 14-11-12 and it revealed that the complainant purchased goods worth of Rs.40,000/-.  In all the complainant purchased goods worth of Rs.2,88,653/-.  The averments made by the complainant in page 4 of his complaint almost tallied with the purchases mentioned by M/s SBICPSL in its account statements.  

16.    It is the contention of the complainant that he made payments as mentioned in Exs.A-5 to A-10 as per messages received to his mobile.   It is also further case of the complainant that he did not receive statements.   Inspite of that the complainant is quite aware of the purchases made by him.   As already stated supra the complainant is quite aware of M/s SBICPSL charging interest at 3.33% p.m., after the expiry of grace period of 50 days.   Under those circumstances, the contention of the complainant about                   M/s SBICPSL charging interest at 3.33% p.m., did not amount to deficiency in service.   The complaint for the reasons best known to him even did not issue any notice prior to filing the complaint requiring account copy. 

17.    Ex.A-3 revealed that the complainant is entitled to 9.25% p.a., only on his FD amount of Rs.3,00,000/-.  The complainant is also quite aware that he has to pay interest @3.33% p.a., after the expiry of grace period of 50% even according to him.   Knowingly the complainant failed to discharge payments even after expiry of 50 days.  The grace period of 50 days depends with date of purchase by credit card holder as rightly contended by                    M/s SBICPSL.    On the reverse of Ex.B-1 to B-14 it was mentioned that interest free credit period was allowed 20—50 days is available to those whose outstanding balance in previous months is paid in full.

18.    The credit limit was to the extent of Rs.2,70,000/- either by way of cash or credit.   M/s SBICPSL had lien over the FD amount with SBI, Commercial Branch, Kannavarithota, Guntur.   M/s SBICPSL waited till such period of dues accumulating upto Rs.2,70,000/-.   Under those circumstances M/s SBICPSL deactivating credit card of the complainant in no way amounted to deficiency in service.

19.    The complainant in page 6 of his complaint mentioned that                         M/s SBICPSL demanded him to pay Rs.2,77,000/- towards principal and interest accrued or else they will exercise lien.   Ex.B-13 revealed that                  M/s SBICPSL exercised its lien over FDR of the complainant and realized Rs.295,137.72 ps on 28-05-13.   M/s SBICPSL exercising its lien for non payment of due amount by the complainant also in no way amount to deficiency in service. 

20.    M/s SBICPSL already filed duplicate statement copies (Ex.B-1 to B-14) serving copies on the complainant.   As M/s SBICPSL complied the second relief we answer these points against the complainant.

21.  POINT No.6:   The matter published on the reverse of Ex.A-2 by SBICPSL “Please note that SBI Cards and Payment Services Private Limited (“SBICPSL”) is incorporated as a private limited company under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956.  SBICPSL is accordingly a distinct legal entity from the State Bank of India.  SBICPSL is constituted in consequent to and by virtue of a joint venture agreement between the State Bank of India and General Electric Capital Corporation (a corporation incorporated in accordance to laws of the United States of America).  SBICPSL is responsible for issuance of SBI credit cards and for providing such related financial services and accordingly SBICPSL along with its direct affiliate(s) are alone responsible for resolving all disputes and differences in relation to SBI credit cards without reference to the State Bank of India”,                  cannot be gone through by a person of normal vision and the said paragraph mentioned in such small letters can be easily escaped by any credit card holder.   Under those circumstances, directing the M/s SBICPSL to issue the above statement conspicuously will meet ends of justice.

22.    In view of afore mentioned discussions in the result the complaint is dismissed without costs directing M/s SBICPSL to print the above mentioned matter in a conspicuous manner so that any credit card holder can go through.

Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 10^th day of July, 2014.

Sd/XXX                                       Sd/-XXX                              Sd/-XXX

MEMBER                                     MEMBER                              PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For 1^st  opposite party:   

                                                                                         Sd/-XXX       

PRESIDENT

NB:   The parties are required to collect the extra sets within a month after receipt of this order either personally or through their advocate as otherwise the extra sets shall be weeded out.