Haryana

StateCommission

A/240/2015

HDFC BANK - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE WATCH PALACE - Opp.Party(s)

SANDEEP SURI

13 Aug 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      240 of 2015

Date of Institution:      12.03.2015

Date of Decision :      13.08.2015

 

HDFC Bank, Vatika Atrium A-Block Golf Course Road, Sector 53, Gurgaon.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party

Versus

 

M/s The Watch Palace, G-08, Central Plaza, Sector 53, DLF Phase V, Gurgaon-122001 through its proprietor Mr. Sandeep Kalra.

 

                             Respondent-Complainant

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                                                                                                              

Present:               Shri Sandeep Suri, Advocate for appellant.

Shri Sandeep Kalra, representative on behalf of respondent.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

This opposite party’s appeal is directed against the order dated January 16^th, 2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Gurgaon, whereby complaint filed by  M/s The Watch Palace-Complainant (respondent herein) was accepted directing the appellant-opposite party as under:-

“….the Op has wrongly debited the amount of Rs.40, 305/- from the Account of the complainant to which he is entitled to be reversed in his Account with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of transaction. In this way the OP was deficient in providing services to the complainant. Consequently, he has to knock the door of this Forum causing harassment and mental agony. Thus, he is entitled to compensation of Rs.10,000/- with litigation expenses of Rs.3,000/-.”

 

2.      Sandeep Kalra-complainant (respondent herein) was doing the business of selling watches under the name and style of M/s The Watch Palace.  On April 22^nd, 2012, NRI Mr. Henry, holding an International Credit Card No.9128, Terminal ID No.24000463, Natch No.46 with Merchant Code No.TO9975 and approval Code No.65446A, purchased watches from the complainant by using International Credit Card. Watches were sold with prior approval of HDFC Bank-Opposite Party after generating approval Code by swipe of the card. After sale and the opposite party having credited the amount in the account of the complainant, the opposite party again debited the amount raising plea that the payment has not been approved by the card issuing bank raising plea that the card was stolen by the purchaser.

3.      It is not disputed that the opposite party-Bank is the banker of the complainant and also the approved bank to accept International Credit Card. After the opposite party approved the payment by use of international credit card, the complainant delivered the goods, later the opposite party could not be heard to say that the card issuing bank refused the payment.  It was between the opposite party-Bank and the card issuing bank who have their inter-se arrangement and more particularly, when the complainant sold the goods after seeking approval of the opposite party bank by generating approval code.

4.      In view of the above, no case for interference is made out. Hence, the appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit.

5.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the respondent-complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 13.08.2015

(Urvashi Agnihotri) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

CL