Andhra Pradesh

Guntur

CC/289/2010

Gudiwada Muthyala Rao, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri P.V. Ramana

09 Jun 2011

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
GUNTUR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/289/2010
 
1. Gudiwada Muthyala Rao,
S/o Panduranga Rao, R/o D.No.6-12-81, 82, 12/3 Arundelpet, Guntur.
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. A Hazarath Rao PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. SMT T. SUNEETHA, M.S.W., B.L., MEMBER
 HONORABLE Sri M.V.L. Radha Krishna Murthy Member
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

This Complaint coming up before us for hearing on                     08-06-11 in the presence of Sri P.V. Ramana, advocate for complainant and opposite party remained absent and set exparte  upon perusing the material on record and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-

 

O R D E R

 

Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao, President:-

        The complainant filed this complaint U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act to set aside the bill dated 15-09-10 for Rs.14,675.70 ps issued by the opposite party and Rs.5,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.3,000/- towards legal expenses.

 

2.  In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

 

        The complainant had the credit card bearing No.5176351000-789804 issued by the opposite party.   The complainant used the credit card only on one occasion for Rs.10,000/-.   The opposite party insisted for payment of Rs.13,718/-    including interest and charges.   The complainant paid Rs.13,718/- on 31-10-06 vide receipt No.2937621 towards full and final settlement.   The complainant handed over the credit card for cancellation who in turn broke into pieces.   The opposite party ignored the payment made by the complainant and failed to close the account due to administrative oversight.    Since 31-10-06 there was no correspondence between the complainant and the opposite party.  Surprisingly the opposite party issued demand notice for payment of Rs.14,675-17 ps.   It amounted to deficiency of service.  The complaint therefore be allowed.

 

3.    The opposite party remained exparte.

 

4.    Exs.A-1 and A-2 were marked on behalf of complainant.

 

5.   Now the points for consideration in this complaint are these:

1.Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?

2.Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation?

3.To what relief?

 

6.   Point No.1   Ex.A-1 revealed that the opposite party issued            Ex.A-1 notice demanding the complainant a sum of Rs.14,675.17 ps.  Ex.A-2 revealed that the complainant paid Rs.13,718/- on 31-10-06.  In Ex.A-2 itself it was mentioned that “valid for full and final payment only in supported by the written offer letter issued by the bank”.   The complainant did not file such letter from the opposite party.  As the opposite party remained exparte the contents mentioned in the affidavit are deemed to have been admitted.   It is the contention of the complainant that there was no correspondence between him and the opposite party from 31-10-06 onwards.   Under those circumstances, serving Ex.A-1 demand notice on the complainant by the opposite party amounted to unfair trade practice and it amounted to deficiency of service. Under those circumstances, passing an order setting aside Ex.A-2 notice if not related to any transaction after 31-10-06 will meet ends of justice.  

 

7.    POINT No.2:-   The complaint was silent the reason for claiming compensation as mentioned in para 4 of the complaint (particulars of valuation).  Nothing was mentioned in the complaint about the complainant suffering mental agony and incurring damages on account of Ex.A-2 demand notice.  Under those circumstances, it can be said that the complaint is lacking material particulars for awarding compensation under any head.   We therefore opine that the complainant is not entitled to any damages.

 

8.  POINT No.3:-   In view of above findings, in the result the complaint is allowed partly as indicated below:

  1. The opposite party is directed to cancel Ex.A-1 notice dated 15-09-10 for Rs.14,675.17 ps. if not related to any transaction after 31-10-06.
  2. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.500/- towards costs of the complaint.
  3. The said order shall be complied within a period of six week is from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

 

          Typed to my dictation by junior stenographer, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, dated this the 9th day of June, 2011.        

 

 

 

Sd/-XXX                                   Sd/-XXX                                 Sd/-XXX

MEMBER                                             MEMBER                                        PRESIDENT

 

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

  DOCUMENTS MARKED

 

For Complainant:

 

Ex.Nos.

DATE

DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS

A1

15-09-10

Letter issued by opposite party

A2

31-10-06

Original payment receipt issued by opposite party

 

 

 

For opposite party:   Nil

        

 

 

                                                                                Sd/-XXX

                                                                                PRESIDENT

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. A Hazarath Rao]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MS. SMT T. SUNEETHA, M.S.W., B.L.,]
MEMBER
 
[HONORABLE Sri M.V.L. Radha Krishna Murthy]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.