Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

156/2011

San Sridharan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Citi Bank Card Center - Opp.Party(s)

N.Premalatha

06 Mar 2020

ORDER

                                                                             Date of filing      : 20.06.2011

                                                                               Date of disposal : 06.03.2020

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.156/2011

DATED THIS FRIDAY THE 06^TH DAY OF MARCH 2020

                                 

San Sridharan,

S/o. Late Sri. A. Santhanam,

AL 217/2, 14^th Main Road,

Anna Nagar,

Chennai – 600 040.                                                                                                                                                 .. Complainant.                          

..Versus..

 

 

The Citi Bank Card Centre,

Represented by its Manager,

No.766, Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.                                                                                                                                              ..  Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the complainant     : Mrs. N. Premalatha & another

Counsel for the opposite party : M/s. V. Adhivarahan & others

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to issue ‘No Due Certificate’ to the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and hardship with costs to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he was a customer of the Citi Bank for the past 16 years and availed credit card facility after due application and agreement. The opposite party has sent a statement of letter dated:23.02.2010 for non-payment of outstanding balance of Rs.73,440.95/- towards late payment charges, service charges etc.   The complainant requested for closure of his card account by letter dated:04.01.2006 and emails dated:13.01.2006, 24.01.2006 & 27.01.2006 etc.   The complainant submits that the complainant made payment towards his closure of his credit card on payment Rs.34,720.34/- vide cheque No.427805 dated:04.01.2006 drawn on  HDFC Bank towards full and final settlement and requested to issue ‘No Due Certificate’.  The complainant submits that the opposite party after acknowledging the receipt of payment vide e-mail dated:25.01.2006 towards the closure of credit card once again, informed the complainant  to pay a sum of Rs.1,703.93 and pre-closure charges at the rate of 3% on the outstanding principal.   Further the contention of the complainant is that in the e-mail dated:06.02.2006, the opposite party claimed Rs.3,021.70 towards credit card. The complainant submits that in spite of many representations to close his credit card account along with cheques as well as broken pieces of credit card yet he had received the ‘No Due Certificate’.  The act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by opposite party is as follows:

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.  The opposite party states that the complaint is barred by limitation.  The opposite party states that the complainant was issued credit card No.4568229075008004 on 01.07.1994.  On 11.05.1998, a replacement card No.4568229075008012 was issued to the complainant which was in current till 27.10.2006.   The opposite party states that using the Paylite Loan, the complainant availed Rs.20,000/- in the month of January 2005.   The tenure of the loan was 24 months and the interest rate is 27% diminishing with EMI of Rs.1,088/-.   The complainant is a chronic defaulter in payment of loan.   The complainant required the pre-closure of Paylite Loan account.  The complainant availed the loan and encashed the demand draft.   Hence, from January 2005, the EMI amount was deducted from the complainant’s account with clear demarcation and showing the total number of EMIs and the EMI in respect of which, the bill is raised.  Therefore, when the complainant tendered the outstanding under the card as of a month and sought ‘No Due Certificate’, it was clarified to him that the complainant will have to pre-close the Paylite Loan under which EMIs are due for their tenor with applicable charges and then only seek to have the card account be closed.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant have filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite party is filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B7 are marked on the side of the opposite party.

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled ‘No Due Certificate’ to the from the opposite party as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, deficiency in service with cost as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

The complainant filed his written argument.   The opposite party has not filed any written argument and has not turned up to advance any oral argument.  Heard the complainant’s Counsel also.   Perused the records namely; the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.   The complainant pleaded and contended that he was a customer of the Citi Bank for the past 16 years and availed credit card facility after due application and agreement.   The opposite party has sent a statement of letter dated:23.02.2010 for the non-payment of outstanding balance of Rs.73,440.95/- towards late payment charges, service charges etc.   The complainant requested for closure of his card account by letter dated:04.01.2006 and emails dated:13.01.20016, 24.01.2006 & 27.01.2006 etc as per Ex.A2, Ex.A3 & Ex.A5, copy of emails.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the complainant made payment towards his closure of his credit card on payment Rs.34,720.34/- vide cheque No.427805 dated:04.01.2006 drawn on  HDFC Bank towards full and final settlement and requested to issue ‘No Due Certificate’.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A9, Statement of account from 26.07.2007 to 26.10.2007, it is seen that the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.30031.39. 

6.     Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party after acknowledging the receipt of payment vide e-mail dated:25.01.2006 towards the closure of credit card once again, informed the complainant  to pay a sum of Rs.1,703.93 and pre-closure charges at the rate of 3% on the outstanding principal.   But on a careful perusal of reply email dated:25.01.2006 as per Ex.A6, the balance amount is noted as Rs.1,703.93 and there is no demand related to fore-closure charges.   Further, the contention of the complainant is that for the statement dated:26.07.2007 to 26.10.2007, the balance is shown as Rs.1,278/-.   But no statement of accounts of any manner produced in this Forum.   The calculation regarding the statement amounts also not given.  Further the contention of the complainant is that in the e-mail dated:06.02.2006, the opposite party claimed Rs.3,021.70 towards credit card as per Ex.A7.   But there is no statement of accounts proves the deficiency in service.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the complainant is claiming only ‘No Due Certificate’ related to credit card alone.

7.     The contention of the opposite party is that the complaint is barred by limitation.  But the opposite party issued letter dated:23.02.2010 claiming an outstanding balance of Rs.73,440.95/- after receipt of the entire amount of Rs.34,720.34/- by way of cheque bearing No.427805 dated:04.01.2006 and hence, the complainant was constrained to file this case proves that the case is not barred by limitation.   Further the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant was issued credit card No.4568229075008004 on 01.07.1994.   On 11.05.1998, a replacement card was issued to the complainant which was in current till 27.10.2006.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that using the Paylite Loan, the complainant availed Rs.20,000/- in the month of January 2005.   The tenure of the loan was 24 months and the interest rate is 27% diminishing with EMI of Rs.1,088/-.   The complainant is a chronic defaulter in payment of loan.   Ex.B1 is the copy of Credit Card Application and Ex.B2 is the copy of Loan Agreement.    The complainant required the pre-closure of Paylite Loan account.  The complainant paid a sum of Rs.34,720.34 on 25.01.2006 and claiming ‘No Due Certificate’ against the outstanding amount of Rs.1,703.93.   But the opposite party has not submitted any statement of account.  Equally, claiming 27% interest for Paylite Loan is totally against the Reserve Bank of India norms.   Since, there are dues in the Paylite Loan, the opposite party has not issued ‘No Due Certificate’.  But it is very clear from the records that the opposite party without any proper statement of accounts claiming a petty amount after levying interest at the rate of 27% of interest against the Reserve Bank of India norms as per Ex.B5, statement of account, the opposite party is claiming different amounts proves the deficiency in service.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall issue ‘No Due Certificate’ and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite party is directed to issue ‘No Due Certificate’ and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) to the complainant.

The above amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 06^th day  March 2020. 

 

MEMBER                                                                                                                                                                                               PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	26.04.2005	Copy of intimation of change of address
Ex.A2		Copies of emails between the complainant and opposite party
Ex.A3	13.01.2006	Copy of e-mail regarding settlement of dues
Ex.A4	13.01.2006	Copy of reply mail from the opposite party
Ex.A5	24.01.2006	Copy of e-mail of the complainant
Ex.A6	25.01.2006	Copy of reply e-mail of the opposite party
Ex.A7		Copy of e-mail of the complainant and opposite party
Ex.A8	02.02.2010	Copy of notice of the complainant with acknowledgement card in original
Ex.A9		Copy of statement of accounts from 27.10.2007 to 25.07.2009

 

OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  

Ex.B1		Copy of the Credit Card Application submitted by the complainant to opposite party
Ex.B2		Copy of Card Member Agreement stipulating the Terms and Conditions binding upon the card users
Ex.B3		Copy of letter format issued by the bank to a customer upon availing a ‘loan on phone’
Ex.B4	Jan 2005	Copy of the EMI statement issued by the opposite party to the complainant showing particulars of the EMIs payable in respect of the Paylite loan availed and utilized by him under ‘loan on phone’ scheme
Ex.B5	25.08.2001 to 22.09.2010	Copy of the duplicates of the card statements issued by the opposite party to complainant showing complete particulars of EMIs
Ex.B6	25.01.2006	Copy of e-mail by the opposite party to complainant emphatically stating that his Card Account cannot be closed without payment of the entire balance in respect of the loan availed with applicable pre-closure charges
Ex.B7	06.02.2006	Copy of reply mail sent to the complainant by opposite party in reply to his mail dated:27.01.2006

 

 

MEMBER                                                                                                                                                                                 PRESIDENT