Sri B.NARAYANAPPA,

     President

1. The complainant R. Manohar, Mysuru has filed this complaint against the opposite party Standard Chartered Bank praying to direct the opposite party to retract of their unlawful claims against the complainant and issue him a no-due certificate and  remove the name of the complainant from CIBIL and  pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- towards unfair trade practice and deficiency in service and Rs.20,000/- towards litigation charges and Rs.20,000/- towards consumer welfare fund.

2. The brief facts are that:-

The complainant has been a customer of Corporation Bank, Mysore and few other banks from past several years and maintains a bank balance in the respective bank accounts.The opposite party somehow managed to get this information from the complainant’s bankers in the year-2004.The complainant received call from representative of opposite party stating that the Bank is offering credit cards and interest free loans on such credit cards and insisted the complainant to take the credit cards.

3.      The complainant gave his assent for the said credit card and an interest free loan and opposite party issued credit card and the complainant was informed that since he was married he would be getting an add-on card in the name of his wife and add-on card would also be entitled to loan which also interest free and it was informed to the complainant that there will be initial processing charges levied on the credit cards and loans.  The complainant received a sum of Rs.39,000/- loan for his credit card and Rs.6,000/- for the add-on card issued in favour of his wife in the month of March-2005 totally Rs.45,000/- received by the complainant towards interest free loan for two credit cards.  The complainant being an officer in LIC decided to clear all his dues and paid total sum of Rs.45,000/- in installments  and this fact was brought to the notice of opposite party in the month of June-2005.  The complainant never contacted the opposite party nor did they call  him but to the utmost shock the complainant received a notice dated 11.04.2017 from opposite party stating that current outstanding balance on his credit cards to the tune of Rs.9,705/-.  The complainant called the opposite party and sought an explanation and told opposite party that he has cleared the loan in the year 2005 and never used the credit card.  Again the complainant received notice from opposite party on 31.10.2017 which states that the complainant has a current outstanding balance on his credit cards to the tune of Rs.2,38,398/-.  The complainant fails to understand how such the outstanding balance is due by him.  The name of the complainant is reflected in CIBIL, when the complainant tried to find out the authenticity entry in CIBIL he never received any response.  On 06.08.2018 the complainant issued legal notice calling upon opposite party to retract all their unlawful claims against the complainant and issue no-due certificate.  Hence, this complaint.

4. After registration of this complaint, notice was ordered to be issued to opposite party.  In spite of service of notice upon the opposite party Bank it does not turned up.  Hence, opposite party was placed exparte.

5. The complainant has filed his affidavit by way of examination in chief and the same was taken as PW.1 and got marked documents at Exhibits P.1 to P.9.

6. Heard the arguments of complainant’s counsel.

7. The points that would arise for our consideration are as under:-  

1. Whether the complainant proves that the act of the opposite party by issuing notice to complainant stating that the complainant has the current outstanding balance on his credit card to the tune of Rs.2,38,398/- is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service?
2.  What order?

8.      Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

       Point No.1 :- In the negative;

      Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

9.       Point No.1:- The learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued as per the contention taken in the complaint, affidavit of complainant and documents produced by the complainant.

10.      We have perused the complaint averments, affidavit of complainant and documents produced by the complainant.

11.      It is the specific contention of the complainant that the opposite party by calling him over phone  offered to issue credit cards and since the complainant being married also offered to issue add-on card in the name of his wife and stated that interest free, loan will be issued on credit cards.  Accordingly issued two credit cards in the name of the complainant and his wife.

12.      Admittedly the complainant borrowed loan of Rs.39,000/- on his credit card and Rs.6,000/- on the add-on card issued in the name of his wife totally Rs.45,000/- from opposite party and it is further case of the complainant that he being an officer in LIC cleared the said loan of Rs.45,000/- in the month of June-2005 itself and the opposite party acknowledged the honouring of cheques and promised to close the account as fully satisfied, but no response from the opposite party instead the complainant received notice from opposite party on 31.10.2017 stating that the complainant has a current outstanding balance on his credit card to the tune of Rs.2,38,398/-.  On receiving the said notice the complainant shocked and tried to enquire with the opposite party regarding CIBIL reflecting in the name of the complainant but no response from the opposite party side.  Therefore the complainant brought this complaint before this Commission seeking necessary reliefs.

13.      It is no doubt true that the opposite party had issued two credit cards one in the name of complainant and another add-on card in the name of the wife of the complainant and it is also no doubt true that the complainant borrowed loan of Rs.39,000/- on his credit card and Rs.6,000/- on the add-on card of his wife.  But contends that the complainant cleared the said loan and produced credit card statement showing now balance 0.00 borrowed on credit cards.  The complainant relied upon Exhibit P1 and P2 the copies of credit cards, Exhibit P.4 notice issued by opposite party stating that current outstanding balance is Rs.9,705.05/-, Exhibit P.5 notice issued by opposite party dated 31.10.2017 stating that current outstanding balance is Rs.2,38,398.93/-.  So from Exhibit P.4 and P.5  it appears that there is an outstanding balance of Rs.9,705.05/- and Rs.2,38,398.93/- payable by complainant.  Exhibit P.6 is a copy of legal notice issued to opposite party calling upon the opposite party to remove the name of the complainant and to issue no-due certificate as he had cleared the loan of Rs.45,000/- borrowed on two credit cards. As per Exhibit P4 and 5 the notice of opposite party issued to complainant, the complainant has current outstanding balance of Rs.9,705.05/-and Rs.2,38,398.93/- but in order to repudiate the claim of opposite party as per Exhibit P.4 and P5 the complainant has not produced any documents such as statement of opposite party Bank to show that he has no outstanding balance of Rs.9,705.05/- and Rs.2,38,398.93/- and the claim of opposite party is false.  In the absence  production of opposite party Bank statement the contention of the complainant that he has no outstanding balance of Rs.9,705.05/- and Rs.2,38,398.93/-  payable to the opposite party as stated in Exhibit P.4 and 5 cannot be believed and accepted.  So it appears that the complainant has supressed some of the material facts such as loan account statement in respect of outstanding balance as reflected in Exhibit P.4 and 5.  Under these circumstances the contention of the complainant that had cleared loan to the opposite party and he has no outstanding balance as per Exhibit P.4 and 5 payable to opposite party is not supported by any documentary evidence.  Therefore we are of the opinion that the complainant has failed to prove that the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Hence, the complaint of the complainant has no merits.  Therefore the same is liable to be dismissed.  Hence, we answer point No.1 in the negative.

14.    Point No.2:- For the aforesaid reasons, we proceed to pass the following

:: ORDER ::

The complaint of the complainant is dismissed.

No order as to cost.

Furnish the copy of order to the complainant at free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, corrected by us and then pronounced in open Commission on this the 12^th August, 2020)