Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

140/2009

N.Nagabhusanam - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, HDFC Bank Credit Card Division - Opp.Party(s)

M.Jayakumar

20 May 2016

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   03.02.2009

                                                                        Date of Order :   04.05.2016.

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)

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

 

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

                 DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

 

C.C.NO.140/2009

WEDNESDAY THIS  4^TH  DAY OF MAY 2016

 

Mr. J. Nagabhushanam,

S/o. Mr. J. Polaiah,

No.13/7, Bootha Perumal 1^st Lane,

Anna Salai,

Chennai 600 002.                                      ..Complainant

 

                                         ..Vs..

 

The Manager,

HDFC Bank Card Division,

PO Box No.8654,

Tiruvanmiyur PO.,

Chennai 600 041.                                      ..Opposite party   

 

 

For the Complainant                    :   M/s. M.Jaikumar & another     

For the opposite party                 :   M/s. S.Vidhya.

 

Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  The  complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite party to remit  Rs.600/- in the complainant HDFC credit card account and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as litigation charges to the complainant  

 

ORDER

 

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-  

 

         The complainant submit that  he is having credit card account bearing account No.4346 7810 0240 4234 with the opposite party bank, the assigned credit limit for the said account is Rs.72,000/-.    The complainant has received  the statement of account dated 06.10.2008 and 06.11.2008.  Further the complainant submit that as per the statement of account sent by the opposite party for the said credit card account dated 06.10.2008, the current due is mentioned as Rs.3575/- as to be paid on or before 26.10.2008, the payment due date  mentioned thereon.   Accordingly the complainant has deposited the cheque drawn at Indian Bank, dated 26.10.2008, for Rs.3600/- to the opposite party bank towards the payment of the said due.  Though the cheque was encashed with the Indian Bank and received on 29.10.2008, the said amount was credited in the said credit card account by the opposite party on 31.10.2008 belatedly and the opposite party has also debited late fee charge of Rs.600/- on 30.10.2008.     Accordingly the complainant issued legal notice to the opposite party to remit Rs.600/- as it was deducted on 30.10.2008 for late fee in the complainant account.   The opposite party sent reply notice denying the allegation in the notice.   Therefore the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and despite of complainant’s request  and approach made directly with the staff of the opposite party, they have neither given proper answer nor rectified the said defect and not given credit to the said unwarranted charge of late fee of Rs.600/- debited in his account.  As such the complainant has sought for claiming to  remit  a sum of Rs.600/- to the complainant HDFC Credit card account  and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- as cost of the complaint to the complainant. Hence the complaint.       

Written Version of opposite parties are  in briefly as follows:

2.     The opposite party denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The opposite party submit that  the assigned credit limit of the complainant’s credit card account is of Rs.72,000/-, whenever the said credit limit exceeds, the said exceeded amount of balance to be mentioned in the monthly account  and the same should be paid within the due date mentioned  thereon sent to the complainant monthly.  Accordingly as per monthly statement of account, dated 06.10.2008 was sent by the opposite party bank to the complainant in which the exceeded balance amount to be paid by the complainant within 26.10.2008 was mentioned but though the complainant has deposited the cheque dated 26.10.2008 for Rs.3600/- after collection the amount was received and credited in the credit card account of complainant on 31.10.2008 only.  Since the amount was not paid in time i.e on or before 26.10.2008,  as per the rules and terms and conditions the late fee of Rs.600/- was charged on 30.10.2008 and was debited in the said account mentioning the said particulars the  next  month statement of account i.e dated 06.11.2008 was sent to the complainant.  Therefore there is no fault on the side of opposite party in imposing and debiting Rs.600/- in the account of the complainant, since the said amount was not paid before 26.10.2008, the due date.  Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.  

3.   Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 were marked on the side of the complainant.   Proof affidavit of  Opposite party filed and Ex.B1 to Ex.B5 were marked on the side of the  opposite party.   

4.      The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-

1.   Whether the opposite party has committed  deficiency of

 service  as alleged in the complaint?

 

2.   Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for in

the complaint? If so to what extent ?

 

5.  POINTS  1 and 2 :

 

             Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, the written version filed by the opposite party, proof affidavits filed by both the parties   and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5  filed on the side of complainant  Ex.B1 to Ex.B5 filed on the side of opposite party and considered the arguments of the both sides.

6.    Considering the both side case there is no dispute that the complainant is having credit card account bearing account No.4346 7810 0240 4234 with the opposite party bank, the assigned credit limit for the said account is Rs.72,000/-.   The complainant has received  the statement of account dated 06.10.2008 and 06.11.2008 which is filed as  Ex.A1 series.

                               
7.       Complainant has raised grievance as per the statement of account sent by the opposite party for the said credit card account dated 06.10.2008, the current due is mentioned as Rs.3575/- as to be paid on or before 26.10.2008, the payment due date mentioned thereon.  Accordingly the complainant has deposited the cheque drawn at Indian Bank, dated 26.10.2008, for Rs.3600/- to the opposite party bank towards the payment of the said due.  Though the cheque was encashed with the Indian Bank and received on 29.10.2008, the said amount was credited in the said credit card account by the opposite party on 31.10.2008 belatedly and the opposite party has also   debited late fee charge   of Rs.600/- on 30.10.2008. In order to prove the encashment of the said cheque by the opposite party in the   Indian Bank the statement of the account of the complainant maintained in the Indian Bank has been filed as Ex.A2   and as per the said statement of account the alleged cheque given by the complainant for the payment of Rs.3600/- for the payment of the credit card account due was passed on 29.10.2008 as per the entry found thereon.

8.       The complainant has raised specific grievance against the opposite party that since the cheque for the said due amount was already    deposited within the due date and having encashed the cheque on 29.10.2008, crediting the said amount in the account on 31.10.2008 and also debiting a sum of Rs.600/- as late fee charge by the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and despite of complainant’s request  and approach made directly with the staff of the opposite party, they have neither given proper answer nor rectified the said defect and not given credit to the said unwarranted charge of late fee of Rs.600/- debited in his account.  As such the complainant has filed the complaint against the opposite parties claiming relief.

9.       However the opposite party resisted the complaint by stating that the assigned credit limit of the complainant’s credit card account is of Rs.72,000/- whenever the said credit limit exceeds, the said exceeded amount of balance mentioned in the monthly account  and the same should be paid within the due date mentioned  thereon sent to the complainant monthly.  Accordingly as per monthly statement of account Ex.A1, dated 06.10.2008 was sent by the opposite party bank to the complainant in which the exceeded balance amount to be paid by the complainant within 26.10.2008 was mentioned but though the complainant has deposited the cheque dated 26.10.2008 for Rs.3600/- after collection the amount was received and credited in the credit card account of complainant on 31.10.2008 only.  Since the amount was not paid in time i.e on or before 26.10.2008,  as per the rules and terms and conditions the late fee of Rs.600/- was charged on 30.10.2008 and was debited in the said account mentioning the said particulars the  next  month statement of account i.e dated 06.11.2008 was sent to the complainant.  Therefore there is no fault on the side of opposite party in imposing and debiting Rs.600/-   in the account of the complainant, since the said amount was not paid before 26.10.2008, the due date.  Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint.  Contrary to this complainant being the defaulter and liable to pay  to the extent of Rs.95,858.63 in the said account   to the opposite party bank as on 06.05.2009 as per Ex.B5 series statement of account.   While the complainant  is being repeatedly called upon to repay the same by the opposite parties,  the complainant has filed this complaint  on false grounds and the complaint is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable.

10.    Though the contention of the opposite party that the reason for imposing late fee charge on 30.10.2008 was made as the due amount by the complainant was not paid before the due date 26.10.2008 and the collection of the cheque amount was received on 29.10.2008 is acceptable, as per terms and condition of the credit card account loan,   however the copy of   the statement of accounts filed by opposite parties, in which, the entries in    particular in the statement of account  dated 06.12.2008,  it is found that on “13.11.2008 – REV LATE FEE ST083190066 Rs.600/- Cr”  and in the same statement of account  in the other column the payment of Credit amount is mentioned as 674.16.  Therefore, on the careful verification  of the statement of accounts particulars mentioned above, filed on the side of opposite party, we are on the considered view that the said alleged late fee of Rs.600/- charged by the opposite party and debited in the account of the complainant as mentioned in the statement of account dated 06.11.2008 was subsequently rectified by reversing the said account, as per the above mentioned entries found in the statement of account dated 06.12.2008. However the opposite party have inadvertently failed to intimate the same to the complainant properly in time and also  failed to contest this case mentioning the above fact in this proceedings.  It shows that the staff / officer in charge of the opposite party’s bank, who is attending this case have not taken appropriate care in perusing the records relating to this case maintained   by the opposite party bank in conducting this case before this forum, which is highly dereliction of duty on the part of the concerned staff of the opposite party bank. However we are of the considered view that, since, the said late fee debited in the account of complainant was subsequently revised and rectified, we conclude that   there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. 

11.     Further it is also pertinent to mention that the complainant is the defaulter and not paid the complaint mentioned credit loan amount   due a sum of Rs.95,858.63 as on 06.05.2009  to the opposite party bank.  Therefore, as contended by the opposite party that, the complainant being the defaulter in payment of loan amount the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable under Consumer Protection Act, is also acceptable.

12.    As discussed above we are of the considered view that the deficiency of service attributed against the opposite party by the complainant is not proved, the complainant is not entitled for any relief sought for in the complaint and the complaint filed by the complainant is also not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.   Considering the facts and circumstances the parties are to bear their own costs.  Accordingly the points 1 and 2 are answered.

           In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No cost.

Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the  4^th   day  of  May   2016.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1- 6.11.2008  - Copy of HDFC Credit card bank statement.

Ex.A2- 29.10.2008         - Copy of Indian Bank Statement book.

Ex.A3- 21.11.2008         - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A4-         -       - Copy of proof of delivery legal notice to opposite party.

Ex.A5- 2.12.2008  - Copy of reply notice.

Opposite parties’ Exhibits:- 

 

Ex.B1-   -              - Copy of Power of attorney.

Ex.B2- 10.9.2005    - Copy of Card application form.

Ex.B3-    -             - Copy of Member agreement.

Ex.B4-    -             - Copy of Most important terms and conditions.

Ex.B5- 6.4.07 to      - Copy of credit card statements.

           6.5.09                                        

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.