DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. CASE NO.245/2016
Date of Filing: Date of Admission Date of Disposal:
21.04.2016 26.04.2016 05.06.2018
Complainant/s = Vs. = O.P/s
K. Ravi, 1.The Branch Manager,
Swagatam Apartment, ICICI Bank Credit Card Division
12, P. K. Guha Lane, Sec-I, Block-DC, Bidhannagar,
Modern Park, Dum Dum, P.O and P.S- Bidhannagar,
P.O and P.S. Dum Dum, Salt Lake City, Kolkata- 700064
Kolkata- 700028. 2. Mr. Vinay Balse,
Head: Credit Cards Operations
ICICI Bank Ltd, ICICI Bank Tower
Regional Office, Plot No.12,
Gachibowli,Hyderabad-500032
3. ICICI Bank, Credit Card
Division Kolkata,
116, Dr. Sundari Mohan Avenue
CIT Road, Entally, Kolkata-14.
4. Ms. Sireesha Rachamari,
Manager –Service Quality,
ICICI Bank, Credit Card Division
Regd. Office ‘Landmark’
Race Course Circle,
Vadodara- 390007.
5. Mr. K. Roy,
General Manager Head Credit
Cards and Personal Loans,
ICICI Bank Ltd, ICICI Bank Tower
Regional office, Plot No. 12,
Gachaibowli,
Hyderabad-500032.
6.Ms.Chanda Kochhar
Managing Director and
Chief Executive Officer,
ICICI Bank Ltd,
Office of the Managing Director
ICICI Bank Ltd,
C/o. Nodal Officer,
ICICI Bank Towers South Tower
West Wing, 2nd Floor, Bandra
Kurla Complex,
Mumbai-400051.
Dictated and Corrected Contd…..2/-
- :: 2 :: -
C. C. Case No.245/2016
P R E S E N T :- Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay…….President
:- Siddhartha Ganguli………………………..Member
FINAL ORDER & JUDGMENT
An application has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service against the O.Ps and prays for giving relief for exemption of payment of Rs. 15806.58 which was illegally demanded by the O.Ps along with compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 3,000/-.
The fact of the case of the complaint is that the complainant is a credit card holder, being No. 51766370188044006, issued by the O.Ps in the year of 2004 and the same has been using by the complainant for more than 10 years and all the dues have been cleared by the complainant.
The complainant further stated that he has stopped using the said credit card for more than 3 years due to some reasons. It is alleged by the complainant that during the month of June the complainant received a phone call pretended to be from ICICI Bank offering certain gifts against credit points which the complainant refused to accept. Further, he got several calls from the other end which he did not accept. On 15.10.2014 the complainant received the credit card statement issued by the O.P. No.2 where the complainant seen that an amount of Rs. 7998.52 was due and he became surprise to the fact that he did not purchase any articles from anywhere by using the said card and immediately he informed the matter to the O.Ps. The complainant did not make any transaction with the said credit card since last three years. It is further stated by the complainant that he received the gift pack from O.P. No.7 and after opening the said pack he found that four items in it and the estimated value of the said articles would be less than Rs. 1,000/-. The O.P- bank subsequently threatened the complainant to clear the bank dues which has been increased to Rs. 15806.58 and therefore, for getting proper redressal the complainant filed this case against the O.Ps praying for the reliefs as stated under:-
Reliefs Prayed for
- To give relief for exemption of payment of Rs. 15806.58 illegally demand by the O.Ps for non purchasing any article using the credit card of the complainant along with a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for physical harassment and mental agony of the complainant.
Dictated and Corrected Contd…..3/-
- :: 3 :: -
C. C. Case No.245/2016
- Litigation cost of Rs. 3,000/- may kindly be allowed in favour of the complainant.
- Any other relief or relieves which the complainant is legally entitled to get.
The complainant filed the relevant documents in support of his case which are as given below:-
- Correspondence between ICICI Bank and the complainant.
- First statement and the last statement by ICICI Bank.
- Proof of similar complaints by others as per the Website of Cyber Crime Cell.
- Letter received from RBI, Banking Ombudsman.
- Communication by office of the Asstt. Director, C.A and F.B.P, Salt Lake.
Notices have served upon the O.Ps.
Subsequently, the complainant files a petition praying for expunging of O.P. Nos. 2,4,5 and 6 and the said prayer has been allowed and the O.P. Nos. 2,4,5 and 6 have been expunged from the case.
O.P. Nos. 1 and 3 appeared before this Forum and contested the case by filing written version.
O.P. No.7 did not appear before this Forum and therefore, the case is being proceeded ex-parte against him.
In the W.V the O.P. Nos. 1 and 3 denied all the material facts as alleged by the complainant and stated that the complainant approached to the O.P bank for issuance of credit card sometime in March, 2005 and pursuant thereto the O.P- bank issued one credit card in favour of the complainant as stated above. It is further stated by the O.Ps that for the online transaction wherein the card holder must be visited the respective merchant website and execute the transaction and it required card verification, value expiry date of the credit card as well as personal six digit 3D secured PIN. These details are mandatory for effecting online transaction. 3D secure PIN is purely personal and private to the card holder and would not be known to anybody unless the card holder himself has disclosed the said particulars. It is further submitted that the card holder is responsible for the security of his credit card along with personal secure PIN and must take all the possible steps towards ensuring the said keeping thereof. The bank does not incur any financial liability whatsoever arising out of the missing of the card.
Dictated and Corrected Contd…..4/-
- :: 4:: -
C. C. Case No.245/2016
It is further stated in the W.V that as per the records of the bank the complainant used the said credit card on 17.09.2014 by visiting the Merchant Portal and upon feeding the necessary details as required including the 3D Secure PIN being second and authentication completed the transaction for Rs. 7,999/-. The SMS was sent to the complainant’s mobile number being 9831957899 which was satisfactorily delivered at 10.45 A.M. and an e-mail was further triggered to the complainant’s mail regarding the said transaction. Upon completion of such transaction the complainant admitted the claims to have received a parcel on 28.10.2014 from the Merchant. However, it appears from the complainant’s case
that the complainant did not like such items purchased and being aggrieved he files this case against the O.Ps which is nothing but a frivolous complaint.
It is further stated that the complainant accepted such parcel and sealed package is with him. The complainant further lodged a complaint with the police station and also lodged a complaint before Banking Ombudsman in December, 2014 disputing the said transaction in which the O.P- Bank reiterated that such transaction was a complete transaction requested the complainant to pay an amount of Rs. 10746.11. Further the complainant filed a complaint before the Reserve Bank of India, Department of Economic Affairs, raising the aforesaid allegations wherein the O.P- Bank stated all the facts as stated above.
It is further stated that the complainant refused or neglected to make payment of the credit card despite regular issuance of statement in respect thereof and as on 02.05.2016, a sum of Rs. 15,806/- is due and the complainant is liable to pay the said amount to the O.P- Bank. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the bank.
The O.Ps along with their W.V annexed some Xerox copies of documents.
During hearing the complainant as well as O.Ps filed evidence on their behalf.
From the complaint petition, written version and evidence of the parties the following points have been framed.
- Is the complainant a consumer?
- Are the O.Ps deficient in service?
- Is the complainant entitled to get any relief as claimed?
Dictated and Corrected Contd…..5/-
- :: 5 :: -
C. C. Case No.245/2016
DECISION WITH REASONS
All the points have been taken together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
It is admitted position that the complainant is the credit card holder of the O.P- Bank being No. 51766370188044006 and he has been using the same since long.
It is evident from the evidence of the complainant that he received a credit card statement on 15.10.2014 wherein the O.P- Bank demanded Rs. 7998.52 for using the credit card for purchase by the complainant. But the complainant stated that he did not purchase anything by using such credit card. Due to non- payment the said amount has been raised to Rs.15806.58.
It is admitted by the complainant himself that he received one article sent to him by O.P. No.7 wherein after opening he found some wearing apparels, wrist watch etc. The said articles are with him though the complainant alleges that those goods are of inferior quality and the total cost of them would be less than Rs.1,000/-.
On the other hand from the evidence of the O.P- bank it is clear that there are some systems for using credit card and the secret pin number must not be disclosed to any one and the complainant is the only person who can use the credit card. The complainant obviously used the credit card for purchasing the items otherwise the O.P- bank could not claim the amount from the complainant. It is not the case of the complainant that the pin number has been disclosed to any one and someone else on behalf of the complainant using the credit card. As the items have been duly received by the complainant and they are with him therefore, we may conclude that the complainant must have used the credit card for purchasing the items though the goods were inferior quality. Here, we find no deficiency on the part of the O.Ps. Therefore, the instant case is liable to be rejected.
It is seen from the case record that the complainant is remained absent for last two occasions and thereafter a show cause notice was issued against him as to why the case shall not be decided on merit. But no show cause has been filed by the complainant and therefore the final order is passed.
Hence
It is ordered that the C.C. No. 245/2016 is dismissed on contest against O.P No:1 & 3 and ex-parte against O.P No: 7 without any cost.
Let the copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.
Member President
Dictated and corrected by
Member
