PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.- 79/2022

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member

Smt. Seema Rohidas,

S/O-Surath Rohidas, At/Po- Betrapara, Rengali,

Sambalpur-768212, Odisha                                                                 ......Complainant.

Vrs.

1. The Branch Manager,   Axis Bank, Ainthapali,

              Budharaja, Sambalpur,

              Pin- 768004, Odisha,

2.  The CIBIL, Trans Union CIBIL Ltd.

               One India Bulls Centre, Tower 2A, 19^th Floor,

              Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road,

Mumbai-400013, Maharashtra......O.Ps.

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant       :-         Sri Kusha Biswal and associates
2. For the O.P.No. 1                        :-         Exparte
3. For the O.P. No. 2           :-         Sri. B.Singh, Adv. & Associates      

Date of Filing:21.10.2022, Date of Hearing :04.04.2023, Date of Judgement : 22.05.2023

Presented by Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member

1. The case of the Complainant is about the deficiency in services, intentional negligence, cheating and harassment to the Complainant by the OPs. On dtd. 23.09.2022 the Complainant visited the Utkarsh Small Finance Bank Limited, Rengali, Sambalpur for taking a loan towards meet urgently requirement of funds against the account No. 1463010000000587. After verification of account by the Utkarsh Small Finance Bank Limited, denied him to providing any loan because of an outstanding of Rs. 1960/- is pending in the name of Complainant against a Group loan for which the Complainant suffered a lot and financial harassment due to non-providing loan by the different banking authority. The Complainant several times requested to the banking authority the above loan has been taken by the Complainant from Axis banks and repayment in time made as per schedule date. Then after bank searched the CIBIL Report and confirmed it. Then Complainant returned to home with harassment. After that Complainant wrote a letter to the OP No. 1 and filed a Complainant before the OP No. 1 vide letter dtd. 16.10.2022 for correction of CIBIL and remove his name from the list. The OP No. 1 assured to the Complainant for correction accordingly and the Complainant waited for necessary correction, but the OPs took no steps for correction. After that Complainant personally met OP No. 1, but the O.P. No.1 did not reply anything for necessary correction in the CIBIL. The Complainant suffered a lot since 23.09.2022 to till date with loss of prestige due to gross deficiency on the part OPs and financial loss and mental agony and filed a case before the Consumer Commission.
2. The Op No. 1is set exparte. In Written Version O.P No. 2 submitted that the OP No. 2 engaged in the business of creating, storing, retrieving, compiling, collecting, processing and maintaining a data bank of credit  information relating to both individuals and entities of all types whether incorporated or not, for the use of banks, financial institutions, etc. dealing with the distribution of credit. The OP No. 2 functions as a credit information company under the provisions of CICRA read with the Credit Information Companies Rules, 2006 and the Credit Information Companies Regulations, 2005. In terms of Section 18 of CICRA, it is clear that not with standing anything contained in any law for the time being in force, any dispute on matters relating to the business of credit information is required to be settled solely by arbitration or conciliation under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and not by way of a consumer complaint. The OP No. 2 is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness and veracity of any of the information reported/submitted by the member credit institutions. Such responsibility lies with the reporting institutions as per CICRA and the Rules & Regulations made there under. It is further submitted that when information/data as required under the CICRA is submitted by a member credit institution, OP No. 2 has no reason to believe that any information therein is incorrect. U/s 31 of CICRA, no suit or other legal proceedings can inter alia against OP No. 2 for anything done by it in good faith or in pursuance of CICRA or any other law for the time being in force. In view of the well-defined provisions of the CICRA and the Rules and the Regulations made there under, the Complainant ought to have taken up his grievance directly with the other OPs.
3. From the version and submission of the parties it is found that From the supra discussion it is clear that as a customer of the O.P. No.1 and due to the latches of O.P. No.1 , the Complainant debarred to get loan from different Bank  and suffered a lot and harassed. It amounts to deficiency in service on the part of O.P. No.1.

 Further the OP No. 2 is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness and veracity of any of the information reported/submitted by the member credit institutions. Such responsibility lies with the reporting institutions as per CICRA and the Rules & Regulations made there under. So there is no deficiency on the part of the O.P. No.2.

Accordingly, it is ordered.

ORDER

       The complaint is allowed against the O.P. No.1 and dismissed against O.P. No.2 on merit. The OP is directed to delete the name of the Complainant from the CIBIL. Further the O.P. No.1 is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony, harassment and  inconvenience caused to the Complainant and also pay Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation expenses to the Complainant. In case of non payment the amount will carry 9% interest P.A. from date of filing of complaint till realisation.

                 Order pronounced in the open Court today on 22^th day of May, 2023.

                 Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.