West Bengal

Kolkata-II(Central)

CC/239/2013

SRI SUKHESH AGARWAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V. - Opp.Party(s)

S.CHARTTERJEE.

30 Dec 2013

ORDER


cause list8B,Nelie Sengupta Sarani,7th Floor,Kolkata-700087.
Complaint Case No. CC/239/2013
1. SRI SUKHESH AGARWAL180/2,CIT SCHEME 7M,1ST FLOOR,P.S-=MANICKTALA,KOLKATA-700054. ...........Appellant(s)

Versus.
1. THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V.15,BARAKHAMBA ROAD,NEW DELHI-110001. ...........Respondent(s)



BEFORE:
HON'ABLE MR. Bipin Muhopadhyay ,PRESIDENTHON'ABLE MR. Ashok Kumar Chanda ,MEMBERHON'ABLE MRS. Sangita Paul ,MEMBER
PRESENT :S.CHARTTERJEE., Advocate for Complainant

Dated : 30 Dec 2013
JUDGEMENT

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he had a credit card being no.5415382317038941 from the OPs.  The specific case of the complainant is that he and the OPs arrived at a settlement of the outstanding amount in connection with the credit card dues bearing card no.5415382317038241 and as per written advice of the OPs vide its letter dated 22-09-2010, he made full and final payment of Rs.8,800/- in favour of the OPs by cheque no.031108 drawn on the Federal Bank Ltd., C.R. Avenue Branch, Kolkata and after issuing the cheque in favour of the OPs, he noticed that in the settlement letter dated 22-09-2010 the credit card no had been wrongly written as being the Card No.5415382317038925 instead of the card no.5415382317038941, while he reported the same before the OPs and their collection agent, who assured him to rectify and issue a fresh letter within one another, but they failed to do so due to the reason best known to them.  It is also stated by the complainant that though the OPs and their collection agents assured to delete his name from the defaulter list of Credit Information Bureau of India Limited (CIBIL) and other credit bureau agencies within a very short period after making the full and final payment, by the complainant, but in spite of repeated requests to them, they neither issued a fresh letter after correc ting the credit card num,ber nor delete his name from the due lists.  Finding no other altyernative, lastly the complainant comp-elled to issue a letter before the OP1 on 12-10-2011 to remove his name from the defaulter’s list but shocked to receive a letter dated 234-10-2011 from the OP who asked him to deposit Rs.16,375-54 the waiver amount being due to them.

          Hence this case.

          Truth is that OPs did not turn up though they got such chance to defend the allegations before the Ld. Forum to contest so the case is heard ex parte.  Materials are filed by the complainant and relying upon the documents and unchallenged testimony of the complainant, we are concluding with findings.

Decision with Reasons

On an indepth study of the complaint and on comparative evaluation of the material documents as filed by the complainant, it is undisputed fact that the complainant used one credit card being no.5415382317038941 and as per advice of the OP vide its letter dated 22-09-2010, he made full and final payment of Rs.8,800/- vide chedque no.031108 drawn on Federal Bank Ltd., C.R. Avenue Branch, in favour of OP on the same date as settlement money to them.

          It is stated by the complainant that after the payment, he noticed that in the settlement letter dated 22-09-2010, the credit card no. wrongly written as Card No.5415382317038925 instead of Card No.5415382317038941 and the complainant requested the OPs and their collection agent to rectify the error of the credit card who assured him for such correction in due course of time, but they never did the same and delete the name of the complainant from the defaulter list of credit information Bureau of India Limited (CIBIL).

          The main contention of the complainant is that since there was a settlement as offered by the OP/Bank and accordingly, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.8,800/- against the total outstanding of Rs.25,175-54 which was to be paid in 1(one) instalment and that was honoured by the complainant, so his remaining liability of Rs.16,375-54 was exonerated by the OPs.

          Considering the above materials on record, we are confirmed that it is a fact that the complainant deposited the settlement amount of Rs.8,800/- against the total liabilities of Rs.25,175-54 vide its letter dated 22-09-2010 issued by the OP but after making the payment, he realized a mistake that in spite of his own credit card number wrongly it was mentioned as card no.5415382317038925 in the said letter for which he requested them to rectify the card no and urged them delete his name from the defaulter list of OP.

          Fact remains that in a letter dated 24-10-2011 issued by the OP/Bank wherein they admitted the settlement with the complainant against his credit card no.54125382317038941 but also asked him to deposit again Rs.16,375-54 to delete his name from the CIBIL.  It is true and admitted fact that when there was a settlement between both the parties and accordingly, the complainant made the payment of Rs.8,800/- settlement money as per advice of OP/Bank, now they  cannot deviate from their final decision (settlement) and not to take a plea to pay the waiver amount of Rs.16,375-54 by the complainant to delete his name from due list of CIBIL.  So, we are of the view that the demand for further payment by the OP is illegal, harassing, causing financial and mental agony to the complainant/credit card holder which is unfair on the part of OPs as defined u/s.2(1)(r) of the C.P. Act, 1986 and as such the OP/Bank is liable to pay the litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant for dragging him to file the case before the Ld. Forum and no doubt the OPs are responsible to remove the name of the complainant from the defaulter list of all credit Bureau agencies otherwise according to the proviso inserted in Clause (d) of Section 14(1) of the C.P. Act, by the 2002 amendment, the District Forum , is empowered to grant punitive damages in such circumstances as it deems fit.

          In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed ex parte against the OPs with a cost of Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) against the OPs.

          OPs are directed to remove the name of the complainant from the defaulter list of all Credit Bureau Agencies including the Credit Information Bureau of India Ltd. (CIBIL) within one month from the date of this order failing which OPs shall have to pay punitive damages @Rs.100/- per day till full satisfaction of the decree.

          OPs are directed to comply with the order very strictly within the stipulated period, in default, penal action shall be started for which they give further penalty to the extent of Rs.10,000/-.

 


[HON'ABLE MR. Ashok Kumar Chanda] MEMBER[HON'ABLE MR. Bipin Muhopadhyay] PRESIDENT[HON'ABLE MRS. Sangita Paul] MEMBER