DISTRICT FORUM:: KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SRI P.V. NAGESWARA RAO, M.A., LL.M., PRESIDENT
SRI S.A. KADER BASHA, B.Sc., MEMBER
SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L. MEMBER.
Tuesday, 3rd August 2010
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 34 / 2010
Meegada Subba Reddy, S/o Naga Subba reddy,
Aged about 30 years, Milk Distribution and Real Estate Business,
Residing at D.No.11/35, Gangayapalli (V & Po), Vallur (M),
Pin Code – 516 293, Kadapa (Dt.), A.P., India ... Complainant.
Vs.
1. The Branch Manager,
IndusInd Bank,
D.No.2-787/788/789,
1st Floor, Sairam Towers,
Srihari Rao Street,
Nagarajupet,
Kadapa City – 516 001, A.P.
2. The Senior Vice President,
IndusInd Bank Ltd.,
701/801, Solitaire Corporate Park,
167, Guru Hargovindji Marg,
Andheri-Ghatkopar Link Road,
Chakala, Andheri (East),
Mumbai – 400 093, India.
3. The IndusInd Bank Ltd.,
IBL House, 3rd Floor,
Cross B Road, MIDC,
J.B.Nagar, Extension of Andheri Kurla Road,
Andheri (East),
Mumbai – 400 059, India. ... Respondents.
This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 26-7-2010 in the presence of Sri B.Narayana Reddy, Advocate for complainant and Sri S.R.Srirama Murthy, Advocate for R1 and Sri S.S.D.Ramaswamy, Advocate for R3 & R2 called absent and set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per Smt. K. Sireesha, Member),
1. Complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
2. The brief facts of the complaint is as follows:- The complainant has got Milk distribution and Real Estate business. Due to the business the complainant gets up at 3.00 a.m, early hours. And leave from Gangayapalli village, Vallur mandal to Kadapa city daily up and down at a distance of 30 k.m per day, twice total to a distance of 60 k.m. The complainant works hard till night at 10.00 p.m, and returns everyday after hard sleep. Further the complainant had no other avocations. The complainant had opened an account with one of the branches of the respondents namely at the first respondent bank at Kadapa city in the year 2008 is as,
Subba Reddy Meegada : D.No.11/35, Gangayapalli village,
Vallur mandal, Kadapa. 24516293.
Branch : Kadapa
Type of Account : Savings account – Multicity
Account No. : 0126-K-8898351001
Reference : WKBOP 0280808128
3. And he has been operating the same from Rs.1600/- dt.7.9.2009, Rs.75, 000/- dt.6.11.2009 and Rs.9,000/- dt.9.3.2010, depositing amounts and withdrawing the same as and when required. The respondents have got a number of branches in Mumbai and Andhra Pradesh.
4. While so the complainant received a message from the respondents to his Nokia mobile no.6600 bearing the Airtel connection no.9908884041 on 30.12.2009 during mid-night and the message saved by the complainant is as follows:
LM – INDUSIND
Hurry, Last Two Days
Get 30 Movie D.V.D
Collection FREE, by
Just spending
Rs.9999/- on your
IndusInd Bank
Debit Card till 31st
December 2009. TnC
Apply.
Sender,
L.M. – INDUSIND
Sent
11.32.12. P.m
30.12.2009
5. This message not only disturbed the sound sleep of the complainant but also created a fear complex as if somebody was causing this kind of threat. It is mischievous and meaningless, by which the complainant suffered mentally and physically. Therefore, the complainant caused the issue of a legal notice dated 29.1.2010 under registered post with acknowledged due calling upon the respondents to pay him the claim amount towards his suffering mentally and physically within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this notice, failing which the complainant has no other go except to file the complaint in the appropriate consumer forum against the respondents.
6. Though the respondents have received the legal notice, and acknowledged the same on 30.1.2010, 2.2.2010 and 2.2.2010, but they did not give any reply to the above notices, within the stipulated period of one month. Hence the respondents are liable to pay the claim amount to the complainant.
7. The complainant reduced his previous claim amount mentioned in the legal notice i.e., Rs.4 Crores to Rs.20 Lakhs including costs and so the Hon’ble District Consumer Forum, Kadapa is having jurisdiction to entertain this complaint, hence the complaint.
8. The respondents filed their counter. Respondent No.1 filed the counter and same was adopted by Respondent no.3, Respondent No.2 was on the exparte on 30.6.2010. As per the counter of respondent no.1, the respondent is not aware of the facts mentioned in the para no.1 of the complaint. And the complainant is to be too strict proof of the same. It is a fact that the complainant is the customer of this respondent bank having opened saving bank account with this respondent bank. It is also a fact that the 3rd respondent bank got number of branches in India.
9. From the recent banking, past banking industry in India has changed tremendously. Almost all the private banks and public sector banks are offering best services to the customers for their benefit. This respondent bank has introduced Mobile Banking, Internet Banking, Debit Card, RTGS, NEFT etc., for the benefit of the customers and with a view to serve them to their satisfaction. Regarding Mobile Banking, it is a facility provided to the customers to enable them to know the transactions and their accounts in their mobile phones without going to the banks. The customer can operate their accounts from their houses without going to bank and they can save their valuable time, through Mobile Banking. If any one of the customers account is adopted or credited, bank immediately informs to the customers by sending SMS (message) to the customers mobile phones. All the customers have to inform their mobile phone numbers to the banks at the time of opening of their accounts. Apart from that all the banks introduce various schemes for the benefit of the customers and they inform the schemes to the customers by sending through messages (SMS). It is an option of the customers to avail the services of the banks. Normally banks or any other financial institutions send the messages about the schemes introduced by it in bulk and not to single customer. Messages would not reach the parties immediately and it takes time. At the first instance the message reaches mobile operator and from them it reaches the customers, in that process it takes time to reach the customer.
10. In the present complaint it is the case of the complainant that he received a message from the bank to his Nokia mobile of Airtel company about the offer made by the bank at mid-night i.e., at 11.32.P.m on 30.12.2009. It is pertained to mentioned that the said message had been sent not only to the complainant herein, but also to all the customers of the bank informing that they would purchase articles or any other items worth of Rs.9999/- by using the Debit Cards of the bank, they would get 30 movie DVD collections free of cost from the bank. The allegations of the complainant that the said message has disturbed the sound sleep of the complainant and also created fear complex as if somebody is causing this kind of threat etc., are all false and baseless. It is pertained to mention here that the bank has sent messages only for the benefit of its customers and the bank has no other bad intention to make the customers disturbed or to create any sort of fear complexion. It is not the case of the complainant that the bank has sent threatening message to him on account of that message the complainant suffered a lot. Usually message in mobile phones reach any persons without any ring tones unlike phone calls. Only a ‘Beep’ would alert the person that message reached to his cell phones. The question of suffering mentally and physically does not arise if a message reach to a particular person unlike in the present case. It is submitted that the complainant without any basis making wild allegations against to the bank. The respondent bank has not conducted any deficiency of services to target the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. It is not the case of the complainant that this respondent’s bank has not credited the amount to his account or that the respondent bank adopted this account without his notice. Sending a message of this kind does not amount to deficiency of service on the part of this respondent bank. It is submitted that the complainant has demanded his respondent to pay him an amount of Rs.4 Crores in the legal notice dated 29.1.2010. For the reasons based known to the complainant he has reduced his claim from Rs.4 Crores to Rs.20 Lakhs only. Non issuance of reply notice does not amount to admission of the case of the complainant. Issuance of the reply notice is not mandatory. It is submitted that the complainant has filed this present complaint to make an unlawful gain even though there is no deficiency of service on the part of this respondent. In the above circumstances, the complaint may be dismissed with exemplary costs.
11. On behalf of the complainant exhibits A1 to A6 are marked. And 1 material object i.e., a cell phone said in which the message were saved by the complainant was also marked as MO.1. There are nil exhibits on behalf of the respondents.
12. From the above pleadings these issues are taken for consideration.
ISSUES:
i. Whether the complainant is liable to pray for compensation?
ii. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the respondent or not?
iii. To what relief?
13. Points No. 1 & 2. As per the compliant the complainant got Milk distribution and Real Estate business. Here the complainant wake up early in the morning by 3.00 A.m and he travels daily up and down 60 k.m from Gangayapalli village to Kadapa city and reaches home in the night at 10.00 P.m. Other than this milk distribution and real estate business the complainant has no other avocation. Here the complainant did not mention his earnings by way of milk distribution and real estate business. If the complainant had mentioned his earnings then it will be very clear to find out his financial status. Here the complainant had not mentioned about his earnings and payment of income tax from his earnings. As the business person the complainant opened one savings bank account with the first respondent bearing A/C.No.0126-K-88983-001 under exhibit A1. He operated the account with Rs.1,600/- , Rs.75,000/- and Rs.9,000/-
duly. While so on 30.12.2009 the complainant get received a message from the respondents to his Nokia mobile no.6600 bearing Airtel connection no.9908884041 i.e., M.O.1, the message is as follows:
LM – INDUSIND, Hurry Last Two Days, Get 30 Movie DVD collections FREE, by Just Spending Rs.9999/- on your INDUSIND BANK Debit Card till 31.12.2009, TnC, apply, Sender LM – IndusInd, Sent 11.32.12 p.m, 30.12.2009.
At the time of this message, that is in the mid-night of 30.12.2009 at 11.32 p.m the complainant was in deep sleep it resulted the complainant disturbing the sound sleep. Usually messages in mobile phones reach the person without any ring tones unlike phone calls, only a ‘Beep’ sound will alert the person that the message reached to his cell phone. So there is no question of disturbing sound sleep of complainant. As the counsel for complainant stated that there exists faction in the complainant’s village & the complainant is having rivals in the village, the complainant was afraid of the message in the late hours of his sleep. In fact no factionist will have deep sleep in the night. The factionists mind will be always ringering with either taking of revenge on opposite parties or apprehension of threat by opposite parties. So, there is no question of deep sleep to a person, who is in faction. Whenever a person is in sound sleep he may not hear this ‘Beep’ sound. Not only the respondent banks but also all the private and public sector banks are offering best services to their customers for the benefit of the customers only. In this view the respondent bank had introduced Mobile Banking, Internet Banking, Debit Cards, RTGS, NEFT etc., for the benefit of its customers and with a view to serve them up to their satisfaction. Regarding the Mobile Banking, it is a facility provided to the customers to enable them to know the transactions and their amount in their mobiles without going to the branches. The customers can operate their banking accounts through their mobile phones to save their valuable time. If any one of the customers amount is either debited or credited into the bank, the bank informs to the customers by sending SMS (message) to their mobile phones. Apart from all these facilities, the banks introduced various beneficial schemes for the benefit and they inform their schemes to their customers by sending SMS (message). This type of service does not given under the perview of deficiency of service. Further the complainant issued a legal notice under exhibit A3 to the respondents dt.29.1.2010 demanding them Rs.4 Crores towards his suffering within a period of one month after the receipt of exhibit A3. For which the respondents had not replied this does not amount to admission of the deficiency of service on the part of the respondents. Under exhibit A3 the complainant demanded Rs.4 Crores from respondents 1 to 3, but now the complainant had filed this complaint for Rs.20 Lakhs only. This clearly shows the malafide intention of the complainant to get unlawful gain from the respondents. To demand Rs.4 Crores, the complainant has to show (prove) his financial status and his income tax returns to ascertain his income. Here the complainant utterly failed to prove his case and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the respondent.
14. Point No. 3 Hence the compliant is dismissed without costs and directing the complainant not to file this type of frivolous and false compliant in future. The complainant is directed to take back his mobile phone i.e., M.O1 after the expiry of appeal time.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 3rd August, 2010
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant NIL For Respondent: NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant: -
Ex.A1: Copy of the complainant Opening Account Particulars
showing in 1st respondent bank.
Ex.A2: Complainant deposits (3) Challans issued by the
Respondent bank.
Ex.A3: Legal notice issued by the complaint to respondents
Dt.29.1.2010.
Ex.A4: Registered Postal receipts (3) dt.29.1.2010.
Ex.A5: Registered Postal acknowledgement cards (3) of the respondents.
Ex.A6: Copy of the saved message in Non-Judiciary stamp attested
by the Advocate Notary.
MO.1: Original Cell set which the message was saved by the
Complainant.
Exhibits marked for Respondents: - ----NIL------
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to:-
1) Sri B.Narayana Reddy, Advocate for complainant.
2) Sri S.R.Srirama Murthy, Advocate for R1
3) Sri SS.D.Ramaswamy, Advocate for R3.
4) The Senior Vice President, IndusInd Bank Ltd.,
701/801, Solitaire Corporate Park, 167, Guru Hargovindji Marg,
Andheri-Ghatkopar Link Road, Chakala, Andheri (East),
Mumbai – 400 093, India.
1) Copy was made ready on :
2) Copy was dispatched on :
3) Copy of delivered to parties :
K.U.M. - - -
