Jawaharlal Nehru Road,

P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata.                                                        ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.

                        Smt.  Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member

Order No.   15    Dated  23-05-2013.

            The case of the complainant in short is that complainant had accepted the four credit cards i.e. (i) Cash Back gold card no.4385 8798 2034 0010, (ii) Citi Business card no.4564 0700 0231 1002, (iii) Citi Bank silver edge card no.5189 3691 1708 2009,  and (iv) Jet Airways Citi Bank card no.5546 3706 8922 3003, for some facilities offered by the o.ps. and he has been using the cards over the years and the relative card accounts had also been conducted quite satisfactory over the years.

                On a sudden scrutiny of the statement of the relative card accounts the complainant has observed with much surprise that  o.ps. have been charging intermittently higher monthly rate of interest on the outstanding in the card accounts without any prior intimation to the complainant about such increases in the rates of monthly interest. The complainant here sets out a few examples which would inescapably prove the irregular, illegal and unlawful practices resorted to by the o.ps. The rate of interest applied in the visa gold credit card 4385 8798 2034 0010 during Dec. 2009 to March 2010 was 3.14% while that for the month of April 2010 has been 3.35%. Again the rate of monthly interest changed on the account of Silver Edge card 5189 3691 1708 2009 for the month of March / April 2010 was 3.35% which that for the month June / July 2010 was increased to 3.45%. Similar increase in the rate of monthly interest from 3.15% to 3.35% has been noticed during April 2010 and June / July 2010 in the card account no.4564-0700-0231-1002. In the case of Jet Airways Citi Bank card no.5546 3706 8922 3003 such increase in the monthly rate of interest 3.35% to 3.45% during March / April 2010 and May / June 2010 has been noticed. All these are only few examples of irregular practices resorted to by o.ps. and not exhaustive.

                Complainant’s issue is not the increase in the monthly rate of interest and quantum thereof but his right as a consumer to know exact price / cost of any transaction. O.ps. have neglected and failed to inform the complainant each time they had increased the monthly rate of interest in the card accounts and thereby unlawfully denied the complainant’s / consumer’s right to know the price / cost of transaction put through before the transaction is made. O.ps. have willfully and intentionally kept the complainant in the dark and ignorant so as to expose him to an optionless fait-accomplie position to pay for the hidden cost caused by the increase rate of interest and that too, without any prior knowledge of the complainant.

                O.ps. not only failed and neglected to inform the complain ant in advance about the increases in the rates of interest but also willfully and intentionally never advised the latter the effective dates of such increases in the rates of interest rendering the complainant helpless and clueless to properly scrutinize the monthly card account statements.

                O.ps. knowingly and illegally have been charging and realizing from the complainant service taxes at the rate of 10.30% on the entire interest balance for each month instead of for only on the transactions put through a particular month implying thereby that the former have been wrongfully recovering services taxes on the carried over outstanding interest balance of the previous months for which service taxes have already been charged in the relative months statement. These irregular acts of the o.ps. have exposed and caused the complainant to loss of sizeable funds over the years. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.

                O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

Decision with reasons:

                We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find complainant had accepted the four credit cards i.e. (i) Cash Back gold card no.4385 8798 2034 0010, (ii) Citi Business card no.4564 0700 0231 1002, (iii) Citi Bank silver edge card no.5189 3691 1708 2009,  and (iv) Jet Airways Citi Bank card no.5546 3706 8922 3003, for some facilities offered by the o.ps. and he has been using the cards over the years and the relative card accounts had also been conducted quite satisfactory over the years.

                We find from the record that on a sudden scrutiny of the statement of the relative card accounts the complainant has observed with much surprise that  o.ps. have been charging intermittently higher monthly rate of interest on the outstanding in the card accounts without any prior intimation to the complainant about such increases in the rates of monthly interest. The complainant here sets out a few examples which would inescapably prove the irregular, illegal and unlawful practices resorted to by the o.ps. The rate of interest applied in the visa gold credit card 4385 8798 2034 0010 during Dec. 2009 to March 2010 was 3.14% while that for the month of April 2010 has been 3.35%. Again the rate of monthly interest changed on the account of Silver Edge card 5189 3691 1708 2009 for the month of March / April 2010 was 3.35% which that for the month June / July 2010 was increased to 3.45%. Similar increase in the rate of monthly interest from 3.15% to 3.35% has been noticed during April 2010 and June / July 2010 in the card account no.4564-0700-0231-1002. In the case of Jet Airways Citi Bank card no.5546 3706 8922 3003 such increase in the monthly rate of interest 3.35% to 3.45% during March / April 2010 and May / June 2010 has been noticed. All these are only few examples of irregular practices resorted to by o.ps. and not exhaustive.

                It is seen from the record that complainant’s issue is not the increase in the monthly rate of interest and quantum thereof but his right as a consumer to know exact price / cost of any transaction. O.ps. have neglected and failed to inform the complainant each time they had increased the monthly rate of interest in the card accounts and thereby unlawfully denied the complainant’s / consumer’s right to know the price / cost of transaction put through before the transaction is made. O.ps. have willfully and intentionally kept the complainant in the dark and ignorant so as to expose him to an optionless fait-accomplie position to pay for the hidden cost caused by the increase rate of interest and that too, without any prior knowledge of the complainant.

                It is also seen that o.ps. not only failed and neglected to inform the complainant in advance about the increases in the rates of interest but also willfully and intentionally never advised the latter the effective dates of such increases in the rates of interest rendering the complainant helpless and clueless to properly scrutinize the monthly card account statements.

                It transpires from the record that o.ps. knowingly and illegally have been charging and realizing from the complainant service taxes at the rate of 10.30% on the entire interest balance for each month instead of for only on the transactions put through a particular month implying thereby that the former have been wrongfully recovering services taxes on the carried over outstanding interest balance of the previous months for which service taxes have already been charged in the relative months statement. These irregular acts of the o.ps. have exposed and caused the complainant to loss of sizeable funds over the years.

                In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that o.p  had sufficient deficiency in service being service provider to their consumer / complainant and complainant are entitled to relief.

                Hence, ordered,

                That the case is allowed on contest with cost against o.p. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to remove the discrepancies in respect of the four credit card accounts referred to above standing in the name of the complainant and are further directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees thirty five thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

                Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.