Order No. 15 dt. 25/05/2018
The case of the complainant according to the complainant is that complainant used to use a Credit Card since 2005 having sl.no.5522741000448040 issued by HDFC Bank against the application of the complainant for Gold Card. Complainant was very much particular in making payment against the credit so far availed off and on by the complainant through his credit card. But in 2015 complainant purchased a costly mobile through the credit Card and had failed to pay one amount in 2016 against such credit for which o.p. Bank raised a hiked bill for non-payment. Again, the o.p.-bank was very much inclined to issue statement of payments which were made by the complainant. It is observed by the complainant that the pending amount had not been diminished in spite of continuous payments there to subsequently by the complainant. To know the status of outstanding amount as well as the rate of interest charged by the o.p. bank, complainant issued a letter dated 01.12.2016 seeking statement of a/c. In reply o.p. bank asked the complainant to pay Rs.1,51,723.14 within 10 days from the date of receipt of letter without supplying the statement of accounts. Finding no other alternative complainant lodged this complaint petition with the direction upon the opposite parties to provide statement of accounts in respect of the credit card since inception with compensation for harassment and mental agony and cost.
O.p.1 and o.p.2 contested the case by submitting w/v. Ld lawyer of the o.p. argued that the complaint petition is false, frivolous and baseless. The disputes alleged by the complainant does not fall within the definition of a ‘consumer dispute’ under the Consumer Protection Act as there is neither any unfair trade practice adopted by the o.p. bank, hence the averments as well as the allegations made therein are misconceived. The o.p. regularly raised statements against the usages of the aforesaid credit card which were duly dispatched to the complainant on the address as mentioned in the application form and also on his registered e-mail address. In spite of receipt of the statement, the complainant neglected to pay the outstanding amount and as such as on 08.08.2017 a sum of Rs.1,87,645.074 became due and payable under the said credit card. On December, 2016 the complainant issued purported notice through its advocate which was duly replied by the o.p. bank under letter dated 29.12.2016. Under the said letter it was duly clarified that in spite of repeated reminders the complainant has failed to make regular payments and as such a sum of Rs.1,51,723.14 has became due and payable by the complainant. Hence it might be dismissed with exemplary cost.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant used to use a Credit Card since 2005 having sl.no.5522741000448040 issued by HDFC Bank against the application of the complainant for Gold Card. Complainant was very much particular in making payment against the credit so far availed off and on by the complainant through his credit card. But in 2015 complainant purchased a costly mobile through the credit Card and had failed to pay one amount in 2016 against such credit for which o.p. Bank raised a hiked bill for non-payment. Again, the o.p.-bank was very much inclined to issue statement of payments which were made by the complainant. It is observed by the complainant that the pending amount had not been diminished in spite of continuous payments there to subsequently by the complainant. To know the status of outstanding amount as well as the rate of interest charged by the o.p. bank, complainant issued a letter dated 01.12.2016 seeking statement of a/cs. In reply o.p. bank asked the complainant to pay Rs.1,51,723.14 within 10 days from the date of receipt of letter without supplying the statement of accounts. Finding no other alternative complainant lodged this complaint petition with the direction upon the opposite parties to provide statement of accounts in respect of the credit card since inception with compensation for harassment and mental agony and cost.
Ld lawyer for the o.ps argued that the complaint petition is false, frivolous and baseless. The disputes alleged by the complainant does not fall within the definition of a ‘consumer dispute’ under the Consumer Protection Act as there is neither any unfair trade practice adopted by the o.p. bank, hence the averments as well as the allegations made therein are misconceived. The o.p. regularly issued statements against the usages of the aforesaid credit card which were duly dispatched to the complainant on the address as mentioned in the application form and also on his registered e-mail address. In spite of receipt of the statement, the complainant neglected to pay the outstanding amount and as such as on 08.08.2017 a sum of Rs.1,87,645.074 became due and payable under the said credit card. On December, 2016 the complainant issued purported notice through its advocate which was duly replied by the o.p. bank under letter dated 29.12.2016. Under the said letter it was duly clarified that in spite of repeated reminders the complainant has failed to make regular payment and as such a sum of Rs.1,51,723.14 has became due and payable by the complainant. Hence it might be dismissed with exemplary cost.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that complainant had used a Credit Card having sl.no.5522741000448040 issued by HDFC Bank. Against the application of the complainant, a self employed youth and a partner of M/s Novasia Financier, 1/1 Library Road, Kol;kata-700 026, the credit had been issued in favour of the applicant as per terms and condition of the credit cards. It is also an undisputed fact that complainant had failed to pay an amount in 2016 against his purchase of a mobile set through the credit Card in the year 2015. Again, complainant had noticed that the pending outstanding amount had been there for a long period of time where it were in a particular point of time. To know the status of outstanding amount as well as the rate of interest charged by the o.p. bank complainant issued a letter seeking statement of a/cs. In reply o.p. bank asked the complainant to pay Rs.1,51,723.14. The allegation of service deficiency can be established against the service assurance by the o.ps within the periphery of transaction and within terms and condition of service. Complainant has failed to produce the documents of assurance of service, if any, adhered to the credit facility of the credit card of the complainant. Again, complainant had failed to raise any question against the outstanding dues with producing parallel accounts of remittance of the outstanding amount for justification in favour of his contention. In spite of being agreed upon the terms and conditions of payments complainant has failed to pay the installments in due time. Without paying the outstanding amount in respect of the credit card facility, complainant raised a lame excuse of non-supply of statements of accounts. The failure of payment by the complainant had been tried to be avoided by the complainant by lodging complaint at this forum.
With the above points in view we hold that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practices on the part of o.ps. Therefore, the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, it is ordered,
that the case no. CC/85/2017 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.ps
