Per Shri S.R. Khanzode – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member: (1) This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 15th February, 2008, passed in Consumer Complaint No.332/2003, Mr.Angelo Extross V/s. The Branch Manager, Standard Chartered & Anr., by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune (In short ‘Forum below). The consumer complaint stood dismissed and consequently, this appeal is preferred by the original Complainant. (2) The grievance of the complainant is that, he was issued a credit card of ANZ Grindlays Bank which subsequently merged with Standard Chartered Bank. It is the grievance of the Complainant that ANZ Grindlays Bank had assured not to charge any service charges and the cheque collection charges, still those charges were levied by the ANZ Grindlays Bank. Therefore, they filed this consumer complaint against the Opposite Party named in the consumer complaint, viz. Respondent, in this Appeal, namely, (i) Branch Manager, Standard Chartered Bank and (ii) Senior Manager, Indian Bank Card Centre, Standard Chartered Bank, Banglore. (3) We heard both sides. (4) In the instance case there is no document of merger of these two Banks which could have thrown light on the respective liability accepted by the Standard Chartered Bank. In the absence thereof, grievance which originally with the earlier ANZ Grindlays Bank, cannot be passed on to the officials of Standard Chartered Bank who are made parties. It is to be noted that Standard Chartered Bank itself is not impleaded as a party. (5) Secondly, we do not know why Original Opposite Party No.2 – Senior Manager, India Bank Card Centre, Standard Chartered Bank, was added as a party. Certainly, in respect of these officials, there arise no question of any service deficiency in the light of the circumstances mentioned above. (6) Admittedly, ANZ Grindlays Bank is no more in existence. Further, the complaint of this nature will not fall in a category of deficiency in service. At the most, it can be a case of unfair trade practice, i.e. promised certain facilities are not made available or extended. (7) For the reasons stated above, we find no fault in the impugned order. Thus, finding appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order: O R D E R Appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs. |
