BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT:

SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

C.C.No. 46/2009

Dated: 31..03..2010

Complainant:

Renjith. V.R., Aravindam, T.C.7/497(4), Kanjirampara – P.O., Thiruvananthapuram.

(By Advs. B. Vasudevan Nair & N. Ramachandran Nair)

Opposite parties:

1.The Manager, Payment Assistance Unit, SBI Credit Cards and Payment Services Pvt. Ltd., DLF Infinity Towers, Tower C, 12^th Floor, Block 2, Building 3, DLF Cyber City, Gurgoan 122 002 (Haryana).

(By Adv. Kollamcode D.S. Jayachandran)

2. The Manager, Credit Card Section, SBI, Althara Branch, Vazhuthacaud, Vellayambalam – P.O., Thiruvananthapuram.

This O.P having been heard on 24..03..2010 the Forum on 31..03..2010 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. S.K. SREELA, MEMBER:

The facts of the case are the following: The complainant is the holder of SBI Credit card bearing No. 4317575164064553. Making use of the above said card, the complainant purchased a mobile phone from M/s. Fono Communications, Thiruvananthapuram worth Rs. 10,990/- on July 2005. Thereafter an Officer from the office of the opposite parties informed the complainant over phone that the opposite parties are providing installment facilities for the repayment of the said amount without any additional charge. Upon the said information from the opposite parties, the complainant accepted the said offer. In the monthly statement of August 2005, which was issued to the complainant from the opposite parties, the amount to be remitted was shown as Rs.14,230.51/- which included the price of the mobile phone. It is submitted that quite contrary to the assurance given by the opposite parties, the installment scheme offered to the complainant was not seen given to him. So complainant contacted the opposite parties and the opposite parties advised the complainant to remit an amount of Rs.14,230/- towards the price of the mobile phone. Accordingly the complainant remitted the entire amount of Rs. 14,230/-. Thereafter, on September 2005 the complainant received another monthly statement demanding an amount of Rs.2,574.90/- which includes the installment amount for the purchase of the said mobile phone which was already remitted as lump sum as per the statement of August 2005. Immediately the complainant complained the said fact to the 2^nd opposite party and the 2^nd opposite party agreed to avoid the discrepancy. But quite contrary to the assurance given by the 2^nd opposite party at several times, the complainant received phone messages from the opposite parties demanding to remit the amount covered by the statement of the month of September 2005. The complainant, on several times, requested the opposite parties to rectify the discrepancy occurred on their part. But instead of the same, the opposite party threatened the complainant. The complainant contacted the opposite parties' office and the opposite parties demanded him to remit Rs.4,500/- so as to clear the entire liability. Accordingly the complainant remitted Rs. 4,500/- on 8/2/2006 vide two cheques dated 27/2/2006 and 28/2/2006 to avoid further problem, even though there was no dues from the complainant. The opposite parties are not entitled to claim any amount from the complainant, but the opposite parties used to harass the complainant by making demands to pay amounts which the complainant is not liable to pay and also threaten him upon the same. The aforesaid actions of the opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Hence this complaint for refund of the amount of Rs.4,500/- with 18% interest along with compensation and costs.

2. The opposite parties remain exparte in this case.

3. The complainant has filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked Exts. P1 to P10.

The issues that would arise for consideration are:

1. Whether the complainant is entitled for refund of the amount as pleaded in the complaint?

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

3. Reliefs and costs?

4. Points (i) to (iii): The complainant who is the holder of SBI Credit card alleges that an amount of Rs.4,500/- has been collected from him by the opposite parties even though the complainant was not liable to pay the said amount. According to the complainant, though the opposite parties had assured installment scheme for the remittance of Rs.14,230/-, the price of the mobile phone, the same was not given and the complainant remitted the entire amount. But on September 2005 the complainant was asked to pay Rs.2,574.90/- which included the installment amount for the said mobile phone. The complainant made several complaints to the opposite party and the opposite party had agreed to avoid the discrepancy but the complainant was forced to remit the said amount also. Complainant has furnished documents in support of his said allegations.

5. Complainant further submits that the opposite parties demanded to remit Rs.4,500/- so as to clear the entire liability. The complainant pleads that he had remitted the said amount vide Ext. P1 & P2. As per the said documents it is evident that the complainant had remitted Rs.2,500/- on 28/2/2006 and Rs.2,000/- on 27/2/2006. This according to the complainant has been collected from him unauthorisedly and without any basis. Ext. P8 shows that the entire facts were bought to the notice of the opposite parties. But no reply has been furnished by the opposite parties. Inspite of acceptance of notice from the Forum, the opposite parties neither filed their version nor contested the matter. In the above circumstance, the allegations levelled against the opposite parties stand uncontroverted. Hence we partly allow the complaint.

In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties shall refund Rs.4,500/- to the complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the said amount shall carry interest @ 9% from the date of receipt of order till realisation. Taking the facts and circumstances into consideration there is no order as to costs and compensation.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 31^st day March, 2010.

S.K. SREELA, MEMBER.

G. SIVAPRASAD,

PRESIDENT.

BEENA KUMARI.A, MEMBER.

ad.

C.C.No. 46/2009

APPENDIX

I. Complainant's witness:

PW1 : Renjith. V.R

II. Complainant's documents:

P1 : Photocopy of cheque No. 034095 dated 28/2/06 of Bank of India.

P2 : " cheque No. 034094 dated 27/2/2006 of Bank of India

P3 : " letter dated 8/2/2006 addressed to opp. Party.

P4 : " monthly statement

P5 : " "

P6 : " "

P7 : " "

P8 : " advocate notice dated 5/9/08 addressed to opp. Party.

P9 : Postal receipt.

P10 : Photocopy of letter dated 4/9/2009 addressed to complainant.

III. Opposite parties' witness: NIL

IV. Opposite parties' documents: NIL

PRESIDENT.