Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

48/2012

Ashok Bajaj, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Hongkong & Shangai Banking Corporation Ltd, - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Murthi & Vasan

22 Aug 2016

ORDER

                                                            Complaint presented on:  06.03.2012

                                                                Order pronounced on:  12.09.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

MONDAY THE 12^th   DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016

 

C.C.NO.48/2012

 

 

Ashok Bajaj,

Aged about 55 years son of,

Residing at No.117/65, Wallajah Road,

Chennai – 2.

                                                                                      ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

1.The Hongkong and Shangai Banking Corporation Ltd.,

No.52/60, Mahatma Gandhi Road,

P.O.Box No.631, Mumbai – 400 001.

 

2.Hongkong & Shangai Banking Corporation Ltd.,

No:30, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.

.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                 : 14.03.2012

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.Murthy & Vasan

Counsel for opposite parties                   : Mothilal, Goda & Kalliat

 

 

 

 

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant was having an account with the Punjab National Bank having reference No.25042009348 and was enjoying credit card facility with the said bank. The said facility was jointly operated by the said PNB and the Opposite Party. This was neither informed to the Complainant nor did he has any notice of the same. The Complainant was very prompt in settlement of the dues under the said card and the PNB never had any Complaint against the Complainant nor there any outstanding dues in the account of the Complainant. Suddenly, without notice to the Complainant, the Opposite Party and the PNB’s relationship/agreement in this regard was said to have been terminated, as claimed by the HSBC. On such alleged termination, the Opposite Party has taken over the card No.5548511992011480 (HSBC GOLD). The Opposite Party sending statement of account to the Complainant claiming a sum of Rs.46,028.26/- as opening balance as on 29.04.2009 which HSBC had unilaterally increasing with every bill. The Complainant has been requesting the Opposite Parties for the details of the amount from them. But the Opposite Parties has not furnished the same to him. Instead, the Opposite Party has been writing letter after letter as though the Complainant has failed to pay the said amount. As a banker the Opposite Parties are liable to furnish details of all the charges it is claiming from the Complainant.  By letter dated 22.04.09 and 11.06.09  and others including a Complainant to Banking Ombudsmen and a legal notice from his Advocate, the Complainant has made it clear that he will pay the said amount provided the Opposite Party furnish the details and justification of the said amount. But, the Opposite Parties has been writing the same computer generated letters with so much communication-gap in the bank that each time different department is writing, though the Complainant has replied the same to each departments. The Complainant has suffered mental agony because of the continuous false claim made by the Opposite Party bank which he estimates at Rs.1 crore as he is running a limited company dealing in surgical instruments all over India. The claim made by the bank is unsustainable in law as well as on facts and the same is liable to be rejected. The Complainant has not become due to the bank in anyway and the bank is harassing him. Therefore the Complainant filed this Complaint claiming compensation for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards damages for  his reputation and also costs of the proceedings.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  OPPOSITE PARTIES IN BRIEF:

          The Opposite Parties admits that the Complainant was having  a PNB-HSBC Gold Card bearing No.5177 5599 9992 1522 based on a business relationship between the PNB & HSBC  which entitled the Complainant to hold the Gold Card. It is evident from the statement filed by the Complainant that there was an outstanding of Rs.46,202.26/- in respect of the aforesaid Gold Credit Card. The relationship between PNB & HSBC  stood  terminated with effect from 13.12.2008 and the above said outstanding amount stood adjusted towards principle  credit adjustment in respect of the Gold Credit Card, stood due payable by the Complainant to the Opposite Parties. After such adjustment the Complainant continued to making purchases by using the Gold Credit Card.  As a result there is a further outstanding amount of Rs.12, 338.11/-in respect of the Complainant credit card. The said amount was transferred from the Complainant’s PNB – HSBC Credit Card to the above said Gold Master Card. In such circumstances the Complainant denies knowledge regarding the termination of between PNB & HSBC is not acceptable. The Opposite Parties wrote a letter dated 03.11.2010 to the Complainant, wherein all details regarding receipt of the credit card by the Complainant were furnished. On 23.07.2011 the Opposite Parties sent a letter to the Complainant informing him that the total outstanding in his credit card account has been transferred to J.M. Financial Assert Reconstruction Company Private Limited, Mumbai - 21 by virtue of a deed of assignment dated 20.06.2011 and that henceforth the Complainant has to address all communication to the said company. However despite this letter the Complainant has not impleaded the said company in this Complaint. The banking ombudsman closed the Complaint filed by the Complainant. The Complainant having accepted the used Credit Card is bound by the terms & conditions of the same including the interest and other charges which have been legitimately levied by the Opposite Party. The Complainant has also not suffered any mental agony as a result of any act of the Opposite Party. The sending of monthly Statement by the Opposite Party to the Complainant, claiming legitimate dues from the Complainant cannot by any stretch of the imagination be termed to be illegal or unjustifiable. As such, the Complaint is without any merits and the Complainant is not entitled to any sum towards compensation and prays to dismiss the Complaint with costs.   

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

 

 

 

4. POINT NO :1

          The Complainant was having an account with Punjab National Bank (PNB) and was enjoying credit card facility. The said Credit Card facility was jointly operated by the PNB and the Opposite Parties (HSBC) suddenly HSBC has taken over the Complainant’s Gold Credit Card facility. This fact of taking over was not informed to the Complainant. The Opposite Parties sent statement of account to the Complainant claiming a sum of Rs.46,028.26/-. As a opening balance and subsequently he had increased the amount unilaterally in every bill. The Complainant sought details of the amount from the Opposite Parties letter dated 22.04.2009 and 11.06.2009 and also a legal notice sent to the Opposite Parties. However the Opposite Parties did not furnish any details to the Complainant. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint that he suffered damages to his reputation and status claiming compensation for Rs.10,00,000/- lakhs with cost of the Complaint.

          5. According to the Complainant he had filed this Complaint claiming for his reputation affected on account of illegal action of the Opposite Parties. How the Complainant’s reputation was affected was not pleaded in the Complaint. Further to claim damages for affecting the reputation, the same should have been done in the midst of other public. In the case in hand absolutely there is no pleading by the Complainant that how his reputation was affected and how he is entitled for damages.

          6. Further, this Forum is empowered only to deal with the Deficiency in Service or unfair trade practice affecting the Consumers as per the CP Act. No such pleading in respect of the Deficiency in Service in the Complaint. However the Complainant sent Ex.A3 and Ex.A5 letters to the Opposite Parties seeking details of his accounts statement. Even after such letters the Opposite Parties continued to send statement to the Complainant. no prayer made by the Complainant in the Complaint for non furnishing of details of the statement of account. Therefore from the above pleading and document filed in this case, the Complainant has not proved that the Opposite Parties have committed any Deficiency and accordingly we hold that the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service.        

7. POINT NO :2

          Since the Opposite Party has not committed any deficiency in service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief in this Complaint and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.     

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 12^th day of September 2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 01.04.2009                   Letter by the Opposite Parties

Ex.A2 dated 22.04.2009                   Letter by Complainant through E-mail

Ex.A3 dated 22.04.2009                   Letter by Opposite Parties through e-mail

Ex.A4 dated 27.05.2009                   Letter by the Opposite Parties

Ex.A5 dated 11.06.2009                   Letter by the Complainant

Ex.A6 dated 03.07.2009                   Letter by Complainant along with statement

 

Ex.A7 dated 27.07.2010                   Letter by Opposite Parties along with statement to

                                                the Complainant

 

Ex.A8 dated 03.11.2010                   Letter by the Opposite Party

 

Ex.A9 dated 18.10.2011                   Banking Ombudsman Order

 

Ex.A10 dated  NIL                            Payment summary issued by the Opposite Parties

                                                from December 2008 to November 2010

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE  OPPOSITE PARTIES :

                                          …NIL…..

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT