Smt. Sangita Paul, Member
This is a case filed by Shri Prokash Sanyal, S/o. Sri Prabir Kumar Sanyal of Chanditala Auto Stand, Natun Pally, Subhasgram, P.O. – Subhasgram, Kolkata – 700 147 against the CEO, ICICI Bank, the Principal Nodal Officer ICICI Bank. The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank with a prayer for a direction upon the OPs to make a thorough review of the whole transaction against the Credit Card No.4375519994836003 issued in favour of the complainant by the ICICI Bank, to disclose the total amount of interest (simple / compound or penal) levied upon and realized from the complainant for the facility of this card he has enjoyed, to reveal and mention the total amount of money that has been realized from the complainant by this bank as purchase-value and interest to disclose the rate of interest as has been levied by the bank upon the outstanding dues per month for use of the credit card, to disclose the Moratorium-period and exemption or facility catered to the complainant to submit the claim for one-time settlement of outstanding as calculated and settled after review and revision, to pay compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- from the OPs due to their deficient service that has caused harassment, worries, trouble and pain to the complainant, to pay the cost of litigation.
OP No.1 is the CEO, ICICI Bank. The address is ICICI Bank Tower near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara, Guzarat, Pin – 390 007.
OPNo.2 is the Principal Nodal Officer. The address is Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai, Pin – 400 051.
OP No.3 is the Branch Manager, ICICI Bank. The address is Sonarpur Branch, K.S. Chowdhury Sarani, P.O. – Sonarpur, Dist. – 24 Pgs (South), Pin – 700 150.
The complainant by filing a petition states that he is the holder of a Platinum Credit Card being No.4375519994836003 issued by ICICI Bank in favour of the complainant. The validity of the card spans from 10/2019 to 10/2023.
That the complainant has made the first and last use of the card on 31.10.2019 and 11.12.2020 respectively. The complainant has not enjoyed the facility of this credit card issued by the Bank after December, 2020. The complainant made no payment to clear up the dues from May to August, 2020.
The complainant made no payment on the presumption of Moratorium period being imposed to cater relief to the consumers, in the pandemic situation. So the complainant had never been a defaulter during that period (from August, 2020 to October, 2020). The complainant made payment for the consecutive six months, from December, 2020 to June, 2021. The outstanding dues became to the extent of Rs.17,746.60. On June, 2021 Subhankar Dutta, contacted with the complainant, but he did not disclose his identity. He persuaded the complainant to go and opt for EMI mode for repayment of outstanding amount.
Sri Subhankar Dutta intended to meet the queries and grievances of the complainant regarding Moratorium rate of interest on outstanding amount. Thereafter messages and e-mails were sent. The Bank authority reminded the complainant his liability to repay the dues.
The credit card was used for the purchase and other permissible purpose for total amount of Rs.2,70,000/- only and side by side he made payment of Rs.2,60,000/-. The complainant did not use the credit card since last January, 2021, still his outstanding amount stands Rs.162232.41 on June, 2021.
The complainant was informed that his outstanding had been converted into equal monthly installment. The Bank has claimed Rs.43,757.87 as interest upon Rs.1,62,232.41 with the offer of EMI mode of payment in 24 months. It appears whether the rate of interest imposed, in conformity with RBI Guideline. The Bank was little mindful in serving the interest of the complainant.
Hence, the complainant prays for thorough review of the whole transaction against the credit card No.4375519994836003, issued in favour of the complainant by the ICICI Bank. The complainant also prays for a direction upon the OP to disclose the total amount of interest that has been realized from the complainant by the OP, to disclose the rate of interest, to disclose the moratorium period and exemption or facility catered to the complainant and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- for deficiency in service due to their deficient service.
In the written version, OPs 1, 2, 3 state that the complaint is not maintainable both in fact, and in law. The complaint petition is vexatious, speculative, harassing, mala fide and misconceived. The complaint petition is barred by the principles of waiver, estoppels and acquiescence.
The OPs deny each and every allegation. The statements beyond records are not admitted by the OPs.
The OPs 1 and 2 are not the necessary parties, because they are not rendering any sort of service to the complainant. The complainant sent a legal notice on 06.07.2021 for seeking redressal to the grievances as alleged. The complainant took platinum chip credit card from ICICI Bank Limited. The complainant is using the credit card since 24.10.2019 and not from 24.10.2020. It is clear from the credit card statements. The complainant has been a defaulter in payment from the inception. It is evident from the statement dated 07.02.2020. The complainant has been a defaulter for several consecutive months. Due to delayed payment, he had to pay interest and penal charges as per agreement.
That the complainant enjoyed Moratorium from April, 2020 to August, 2020 as opted by him. That the complainant opted for moratorium which is duly granted to his credit card. As he delayed in making payment, the complainant is a consumer. The complainant has converted his outstanding dues into EMI conversion along with processing fees @2% and IGST @18%.
That the complainant has converted 5 LICs into EMI. The complainant was fully aware that due to non-payment of the outstanding amount in full within the stipulated due date, interest and penal charges were applied in accordance with the agreed terms and conditions of the said credit card. The amount which was not paid within the due date carried interest and penal charges due to which the outstanding due was Rs.1,71,746.66. The complainant is bound to pay the said outstanding amount. Under the banking system there is no provision to provide any reversal.
Due to non-payment of the outstanding dues the OP faced monetary loss. The present complaint intended to make unlawful gain from the OPs. Hence the complaint case is liable to be dismissed.
That the case was filed on 27.08.2021. The case was admitted on 22.09.2021. On 13.12.2021, the OPs filed W/V and Vakalatnama. On 19.01.2022, the complainant files evidence on affidavit. Copy served. On 09.03.2022, the OPs filed questionnaire. Copy served. On 08.04.2022, the complainant filed reply. On 16.06.2022, OPs 1,2 and 3 filed evidence on affidavit. Copy served. OPs filed a separate petition for expunging the name of OP No.1. Copy served and the petition be treated as MA application being No.11/2022. On 15.07.2022, the complainant filed questionnaire. Copy served. On 12.08.2022, OPs 1, 2 and 3 filed reply. Copy served. On 28.11.2022, the MA application being No.MA/11/2022 was taken up for hearing. Heard arguments of Ld. Advocates in full. On 03.02.2023, the OPs prayed that the name of OP No.1 be expunged from the cause title of the petition of complaint.
It appears from the materials available on record that the dispute centered around the Platinum Chip Card of ICICI Bank Ltd. and OP No.1 is contesting the case, after filing W/V. Moreover, the complainant made the OP No.1 as a party to this case, being the Chief Executive Officer of the Bank. He is wholly responsible for the administrative work of the concerned bank, so we find that OP No.1 is a necessary party to this case. Hence, it is ordered that the petition dated 16.06.2022, filed by the OP is hereby considered and rejected. No order is passed as to cost. On 03.07.2023 Ld. Lawyers of both parties are present and filed their respective BNAs. Heard argument of Ld. Lawyers at length in full. Accordingly, we proceeded for giving judgement.
Points for consideration :-
- Is the complainant, a consumer?
- Are the OPs guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
Point No.1:-
On perusal of the documents and records, it appears that the complainant is the holder of a Platinum Credit Card being No.4375519994836003. The credit card was issued by the ICICI Bank in favour of the complainant. Though the complainant did not use the Credit Card yet he is a consumer U/S 2(7) of the C.P. Act, 2019, because he purchased it.
So, the first point is decided in favour of the complainant.
Point No:2 :
The complainant made no payment to clear up his dues from May, 2020 to August, 2020. Thus the complainant has become a defaulter. The complainant made no payment in the moratorium period. After this period, the complainant was serious in making payment. The complainant made payment from December, 2020 to June, 2021. Still his outstanding dues rose to Rs.1,71,746.66. During the period of non-payment of the charges, the interest was increased. In October, 2020, the delay was of 30 days, the interest was charged Rs.7558.09, in November, 2020, the interest was charged Rs.7378.39, in December, 2020 the interest was charged as 6870.76. In January, 2021, there was a delay of 3 days in repayment, and the interest was charged as Rs.7263.41. In February, 2021 the delay was of 2 days and the interest was charged as Rs.6956.04. In May, 2021, the interest was charged as Rs.6340.60., In April, 2021, the interest was charged as Rs.7149.93. In May, 2021 there was a delay of 30 days and the interest was charged as Rs.6823.49. As the full outstanding amount was not cleared, the complainant had to pay the above mentioned amount, the interest is charged day by day. As per terms and conditions, the complainant is bound to pay the charged amount. The payment does not depend on whether the complainant had made purchase or not. In this way, the outstanding amount rose to Rs.1,71,746.66. As the complainant is the holder of the Credit Card, he is bound to pay the same. Hence, we find no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. So, the second point is decided in favour of the OPs and against the complainant.
Point No.03 :-
No deficiency in service and unfair trade practice were adopted by the OPs. So the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for. So the third point is decided in favour of the OPs and against the complainant.
In the result, the complaint case fails.
Fees paid is correct.
Hence, it is,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is dismissed on contest.
No order as to cost.
Let a copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of cost.
That the final order will be available in the following website: www.confonet.nic.in.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Sangita Paul
Member
