Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/61/2007

Mr.Umar, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Axis Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.Krishnamoorthi

06 Oct 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   24.01.2007

                                                                        Date of Order :   06.10.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO.61/2007

FRIDAY THIS 6^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017

Mr. Umar,

Proprietor,

M/s. World Collextions,

No.35, (New No.14), Venkatakrishna Road,

Mandaveli,

R.A.Puram,

Chennai 600 028.                                                .. Complainant

                                        ..Vs..

 

1. M/s. The Axis Bank Limited,

Rep. by its Managing Director,

225, Anna Salai,

(Opp. Spencers Plaza),

Chennai 600 002.

 

2. M/s. The Axis Bank Limited,

Rep. by its Managing Director,

Central office, Marker Tower “F”,

13^th Floor, Cuffe Parade,

Colaba,

Mumbai 400 005.                                             .. Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for Complainant           :   M/s. K. Kishnamoorthy         

Counsel for opposite party        :   M/s. R.Palani Kumar Ramesh & another   

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

 

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.18,000/- with interest and also to pay Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.10,000/- as cost of the complaint.

 1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

         The complainant submit that  he has submitted an application for installation of Electronic Data Capture machine on 3.6.2004 and entered into an agreement with the opposite party bank.   The opposite parties after considering the application approved to install  the Electronic Data Capture Machine  of M/s. Venture Infotech Global (P) Ltd., on 8.7.2004.  On 30.8.2006 one Dr. Krishnan had approached the  complainant for purchasing a cell phone Nokia N72 for a sum of Rs.18,000/- by using his Master Card bearing No.5462 1300 2137 5659 and the transaction was completed and the Master card was accepted by the bank code No.019494, Ref. No.624212513055, dated 30.8.2006.   On the next date i.e. 31.8.2006 one Mr. Ashok Kumar of the opposite party’s Executive informed that the approval No.019494 terminated.  Since the transaction is not authorized and the customer misused the card.   Thereafter the complainant contacted  the 1^st opposite party bank through phone, but the 1^st opposite party gave evasive reply.  Hence the complainant issued notice  on 4.9.2006 claiming a sum of Rs.18,000/- within three days.    As such the act of  the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  Hence this complaint is filed.

2.    The brief averments in Written Version of  the opposite party is  as follows:

      The opposite parties deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The opposite parties state that the admittedly the Electronic Data Capture machine was installed at the request of the complainant.   The complainant also entered into an agreement on 3.6.2004  with the opposite parties for installation of Electronic Data Capture machine at their place according all the terms and conditions therein.  M/s. Venture Infotech (Global) P. Ltd  approved vendor the opposite party duly installed the Electronic Data Capture machine and was confirmed on 15.5.2006.   The opposite party also state that  on 30.8.2006 the complainant accepted the transaction for an International Credit Card No. 5462 1300 2137 5659 for Rs.18,000/- on suspension the transaction was not concluded. Since there are several frauds involved such transactions.  As per Clause 2.4 of the agreement the complainant shall produce the I.D. card with valid passport and visa etc.   Similarly as per clause 10.5 of the agreement if the opposite parties at any reasonable suspension regarding the Merchant transaction; the opposite parties right to suspend all payment.    As per Clause 11 of the agreement the opposite parties shall be entitled at any time to refuse total or partial payment to the Merchant and entitled to reimburse the amount from the Merchant.     Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite parties filed and Ex.B1 to Ex.B4  marked on the side of the opposite parties.

4.   The points for the consideration is: 

Whether the complainant is entitled  to a sum of Rs.18,000/- with interest as prayed for?

Whether the complainant is entitled  to a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- as prayed for?

5.      POINTS 1 & 2:-

          The complainant and his counsel absence for long time and have not turned up to advance any oral arguments.   Equally the opposite parties filed their written arguments and have not turned up to advance any oral arguments.    The complainant pleaded in the complaint and proof affidavit that he has submitted an application for installation of Electronic Data Capture machine on 3.6.2004 and entered into an agreement with the opposite party bank.   The opposite parties after considering the application approved to install  the Electronic Data Capture Machine  of M/s. Venture Infotech Global (P) Ltd., on 8.7.2004 is admitted.  On 30.8.2006 one Dr. Krishnan had approached the  complainant for purchasing a cell phone Nokia N72 for a sum of Rs.18,000/- by using his Master Card bearing No.5462 1300 2137 5659 and the transaction was completed and the Master card was accepted by the bank code No.019494, Ref. No.624212513055, dated 30.8.2006.   On the next date i.e. 31.8.2006 one Mr. Ashok Kumar of the opposite party’s Executive informed that the approval No.019494 terminated.    Since the transaction is not authorized and the customer misused the card.   Thereafter the complainant contacted  the 1^st opposite party bank through phone, but the 1^st opposite party gave evasive reply.  Hence the complainant issued notice  on 4.9.2006 claiming a sum of Rs.18,000/- within three days and filed this case.   The complainant claiming a sum of Rs.18,000/- towards transaction and a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony.  But it is apparently seen that the complainant has not paid or deposited any amount before the 1^st opposite party bank.  

6.     The learned counsel for the opposite parties contended that admittedly   the Electronic Data Capture machine was installed at the request of the complainant.   The complainant also entered into an agreement on 3.6.2004  with the opposite parties for installation of Electronic Data Capture machine at their place according all the terms and conditions therein.   M/s. Venture Infotech (Global) P. Ltd  approved vendor the opposite party duly installed the Electronic Data Capture machine and was confirmed on 15.5.2006. 

7.     It is also admitted that on 30.8.2006 the complainant accepted the transaction for an International Credit Card No. 5462 1300 2137 5659 for Rs.18,000/- on suspension the transaction was not concluded. Since there are several frauds involved such transactions.  As per Clause 2.4 of the agreement the complainant shall produce the I.D. card with valid passport and visa etc as per Ex.A3.   In this case the complainant has not produced any such documents.  Similarly as per clause 10.5 of the agreement if the opposite parties at any reasonable suspension regarding the Merchant transaction; the opposite parties right to suspend all payment.    As per Clause 11 of the agreement the opposite parties shall be entitled at any time to refuse total or partial payment to the Merchant and entitled to reimburse the amount from the Merchant.   In this case, the complainant without submitted the proper I.D. card utilized the machine for mercies was rightly terminated.  The opposite parties further contended that the claim is imaginary and there is no deficiency of service committed by the opposite parties.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for in the complaint and the points 1 & 2 are answered accordingly. 

                        In the result the complaint is dismissed.  No cost.

            Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 6^th day  of  October  2017.  

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

 

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1- 30.8.2006 - Copy of Charge slip.

Ex.A2- 30.8.2006  - Copy of credit bill.

Ex.A3- 31.8.2006  - Copy of order of Termination.

Ex.A4- 4.9.2006    - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A5- 5.9.2006    - Copy of Ack. Card.

Ex.A6- 11.9.2006  - Copy of reply notice.

 

Opposite parties’ side document: -     

Ex.B1- 2.2.2010    - Copy of Authorization letter.

Ex.B2- 25.5.2004  - Copy of EDC Agreement.

Ex.B3- 8.6.2004    - Copy of installation certificate.

Ex.B4-         -       - Copy of training letter.

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.