CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VII

DISTRICT: SOUTH-WEST

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

FIRST FLOOR, PANDIT DEEP CHAND SHARMA SAHKAR BHAWAN

CASE NO.CC/556/13

          Date of Institution:-   23.10.2013

          Order Reserved on:- 04.03.2024

                  Date of Decision:-     03.05.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shri Raj Yashartha

Senior Engineer, SMMS Department,

EIB-9^th Floor, Engineers India Ltd.

1-Bhikaji Cama Place,

R.K. Puram, New Delhi - 110066

.….. Complainant

VERSUS

1. State Bank of India

IIT Delhi Branch, Hauz Khas,

New Delhi – 110016

2. SBI Cards

Customer Correspondence Unit,

DLF Infinity Tower-C,

12th Floor, Block-2, Building No.3

DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon-122002

3. State Bank Cards & Payment Services Pvt. Ltd.

Unit 401 & 402, 4^th Floor,

Aggarwal Millenium Tower,

E-1,2,3, Netaji Subhash Place,

Wazirpur, New Delhi – 110034

4. State Bank of India,

Local Head Office,

11, Parliament Street,

New Delhi - 110001

.…..Opposite Parties

Suresh Kumar Gupta, President

1. The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as Act) with the allegations thatSBI Credit Card no. xxxxxxxxxx7172 was issued to him in November, 2011. On 08.02.2013, he has received SMS alert on his mobile about the credit of Rs.14169.51/- in his account. He verified the transaction as it was unusual upon which it was informed by customer care that transaction was made by him in Euro from outside the India on 06.02.2013 for Rs.15538.46/- which has now been cancelled and amount is credited. He informed the customer care that no such transaction was made by him. He was advised to surrender the card and make a request for a new card. On 20.08.2013, he has received a new card bearing no.xxxxxxxxx2907 through Blue Dart Courier and updated the details in the evening. Two SMS alerts were received in the night of 20.02.2013 (12:00 night) and on 21.02.2013 at 4.00AM regarding the transactions of Rs.954.08/- and Rs.40,722.56/-. He immediately contacted the customer case and blocked the card. He was asked to submit Dispute Form for the transactions. He kept on writing mails to the OP and it was informed that internal inquiry will take 120 days to investigate. On 22.05.2013, he has received an email from OP that disputed transactions were complete and valid so liability rests with the complainant. He has been receiving threatening phone calls from agents of OP upon which complaint dated 30.05.2013 was given to PS,R. K. Puram, New Delhi. On 27.05.2013, he wrote an email to OP to furnish details of origin/IP address of the transactions which was denied as case is closed. On 17.06.2013, he received SMS that request from UK shipment has been denied as card is blocked. On 12.08.2013, he went to the Head Office of OP-2 and narrated the incident. On 14.08.2013, he received email from Nodal officer of OP-2 that transaction took place in a secured electronic environment and have been validated in the card. There is deficiency on the part of OP. Hence, this complaint.

2. OP-1 and 4 have filed the joint reply to the effect that OP-2 has issued the credit card to the complainant. They are neither necessary nor proper parties as there is no averment against them in the complaint. The allegations in the prayer clause are wrong and denied.

3. OP-2 and 3have filed the joint reply to the effect that complainant has suppressed the material facts from the Commission. There is no cause of action against them. This forum does not have territorial jurisdiction to try the complaint. It is matter of record that complainant has received SMS alert of transaction of Rs.14169.51/- on 08.02.2013. The transaction was valid as same has been done through password. The credit card was blocked at the request of the complainant. The internal inquiry shows that transaction was a valid transaction which was done through password created by the customer himself as there was no change in mobile number. The emails written by the complainant were duly replied. There is no merit in the complaint.

4. The complainant has filed the rejoinder to the written statement of OPs wherein he has denied the averments of written statements and reiterated the stand taken in the complaint.

5. The parties were directed to lead the evidence.

6. The complainant did not file the affidavit by way of evidence.
7. The OP-2 and 3 have filed the affidavit of Sh. Punit Babbar,in evidence and corroborated the version of written statement.

8. The OP-1 and 4 have filed the affidavit of Sh.R. K. Kulshrestha, Manager and Principal Officer of SBI, in evidence and corroborated the version of written statement.

9. We have heard the complainant as time was given to Ld. Counsel for OP-2 and 3 to address the arguments within 10 days on 04.03.2024 and perused the entire material on record.

10. The complaint is decided on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties and not on the basis of the pleadings.

11. The complainant has not filed the evidence by way of an affidavit. The allegations in the complaint have to be proved or substantiated by way of evidence. The complaint is not decided on the basis of pleadings. There is no evidence in support of pleadings.

12. The complainant has failed to lead the evidence. This is a case of no evidence.

13. In view of above discussion, the complainant has failed to substantiate the allegations as set out in the complaint and accordingly the complaint is dismissed.

• A copy of this order is to be sent to all the parties as per rule.
• File be consigned to record room.
• Announced in the open court on 03.05.2024.