IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> <br /> CC 343/09 DATED 17.12.2009<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant Kiran Kumar, G-2, Sri <br /> Vara Krishna, No.5, 3rd Main, V.V.Mohalla, Behind Ramakrishna Ashram, Mysore-570002.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. S.L.Prabhakar, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Party The Manager, The ICICI Bank Ltd. Credit Card Division RAPG, 1st Floor, CH 34/2,3,4, Deekshas Shetty Mansion, Ramavilas Road, Mysore-570024.<br /> <br /> (By Sri M.Siddalingaswamy, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 09.09.2009<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : 30.09.2009<br /> Date of order : 17.12.2009<br /> Duration of Proceeding : 2 MONTH 17 DAYS<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, the complainant has filed the complaint against the opposite party, seeking a direction to receive Rs.2,229/- from the complainant and cancel the credit card issued to the complainant and further award damages of Rs.5,00,000/- for high handed act of the opposite party.<br /> <br /> 2. Amongst other facts in the complaint, it is alleged that, the opposite party has issued credit card to the complainant. The complainant has utilized the credit card and is due only Rs.2,229/- to the opposite party. By issuing notice, opposite party is demanding Rs.53,125.38 from the complainant. Opposite party has not taken into consideration, the payments made by the complainant before the said demand. The opposite party has charged penalty. It is illegal and opposed to law. Opposite party has charged interest on interest. Opposite party has not allowed the complainant to use credit card. Opposite party has charged over limit fees. It is illegal. Also, it is alleged that, on 17.08.2008, the opposite party sent agents who assaulted complainant and his wife, for which criminal complaint has been lodged with the police. On these grounds, it is prayed to allow the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. The opposite party has filed version, contending that, complainant has maintain the account irregularly. For every borrowing and credit purchase, complainant is bound to pay interest from the same date. It is contend that, complainant being defaulter, cannot claim damages. Other allegations made in the complaint are denied.<br /> <br /> 4. To prove their respective contentions, the complainant as well as power of attorney holder of the opposite party have filed their affidavits. Certain documents are filed. For both parties, written arguments are filed. We have perused the entire material on record.<br /> <br /> 5. Now the points arises for consideration are as under:-<br /> 1. Whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and that he is entitled to any reliefs?<br /> 2. What order?<br /> <br /> 6. Our findings are as under:-<br /> Point no.1 : Partly in the affirmative.<br /> Point no.2 : As per the order.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 7. Point no. 1:- Admittedly, the complainant is the credit card holder of the opposite party bank and has made several transactions. The main grievance of the complainant is that, the interest and other charges levied, is illegal. Hence, the complainant sought a direction to the opposite party to cancel the credit card. <br /> <br /> 8. Bundle of monthly statements were produced and considering the entire facts, the Forum directed the parties to file a statement of account working out the total amount that the complainant availed through the credit card and the total amount paid and also the interest and other charges claimed by the opposite party bank. Since, the complainant has approached the Forum, he was directed to submit the statement of account and accordingly, a statement was furnished. On going through the said statement, the Forum found three months amount was left out and hence, again the Forum directed the complainant to submit fresh statement. The Forum also had given an opportunity to the opposite party bank, directing that it may put it’s say in the matter. Accordingly, the complainant has submitted fresh statement of account. The opposite party bank has not raised any objections regarding the correctness or otherwise of the said statement. It is submitted for the complainant by the learned advocate that, said statement has been prepared on the basis of the monthly statements furnished by the opposite party bank. Hence, under the circumstances, we have to accept the correctness of the said statement.<br /> <br /> 9. In the said statement dated 16.12.2009, the total amount availed by the complainant through the credit card is shown as Rs.3,51,776.28 and the total amount that, the complainant has paid or credited into the said credit card account is Rs.3,62,897.21. Thus, it is submitted that, in fact, a sum of Rs.11,121/- has been paid by the complainant to the opposite party bank in excess of the amount spent by the complainant through the said credit card.<br /> <br /> 10. In the statement it is also mentioned that, the opposite party bank has charged interest, surcharge etc., amounting to Rs.67,733.84. This is also based on the monthly statements of the opposite party bank and the opposite party bank has not disputed it.<br /> <br /> 11. As noted above, the main dispute raised by the complainant is, the interest and other charges demanded by the opposite party bank. That demand is not disputed by the opposite party. The opposite party contend that, the complainant maintained the account irregularly and from the date of borrowing and credit purchase, the complainant is bound to pay the interest. Hence, the opposite party bank contend that, the complainant being a defaulter, is liable to pay the interest and other charges.<br /> <br /> 12. It is pointed out by the learned advocate for the complainant that, the complainant card holder is entitled to get interest free credit for a period of 45 days to the extent of the limit sanctioned. But, in the case on hand, the opposite party has charged the interest illegally. As noted here before in the version, the opposite party has specifically contended that, for every credit purchase, the complainant is bound to pay interest from the said date. Thus, as contended in the version, according to the opposite party bank from the date of credit purchase itself, the complainant card hold is liable to pay interest. To substantiate this fact for the opposite party, no contract between the parties or the Rules and Regulations of the bank are placed on record. Moreover, the claim of the complainant that for a period of 45 days, the complainant credit card holder is entitled for interest free credit is not denied or disputed. When that is so, the contention of the opposite party that, from the date of purchase itself, the complainant is liable to pay interest cannot be accepted. Consequently, the interest and other charges claimed and demanded by the opposite party bank is illegal. <br /> <br /> 13. Advocate for the complainant submitted that, in the complaint, it is stated that, the complainant was still due a sum of Rs.2,229/- and collecting that amount, the opposite party may be directed to cancel the credit card. But, now, the advocate with reference to the statement of account furnished, submitted that in fact no amount is to be made by the complainant to the opposite party bank and in fact excess payment of Rs.11,121/- is paid by the complainant to the opposite party bank. At the cost of repetition, this fact being not disputed by the opposite party bank, we have to accept the same.<br /> <br /> 14. Considering the facts, since the opposite party bank is demanding the amount illegally, under the circumstances, the claim of the complainant to direct the opposite party to cancel the credit card, is justified.<br /> 15. Accordingly we answer the point partly in affirmative.<br /> <br /> 16. Point No. 2:- Considering the discussion made above and conclusion arrived at, we pass the following order:- <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is partly allowed.<br /> 2. The opposite party bank is hereby directed to cancel the credit card of the complainant having customer No.5177194198649003 immediately on receipt of the said card from the complainant.<br /> 3. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 17th December 2009)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />