Date of filing: 18.10.2021
Date of disposal: 02.02.2023
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
THIRUVALLUR
BEFORE TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L, Ph.D (Law) .…. PRESIDENT
THIRU.P.MURUGAN,M.Com.,ICWA (Inter), B.L., ....MEMBER-II
CC. No.52/2021
THIS THURSDAY, THE 02nd DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023
Mr.Mehendraselvan,
S2/45, BHEL Township,
Kamarajapuram,
Boiler Project (PO), Tirchy 620 014. ……Complainant.
//Vs//
1.YES Bank Limited,
Rep. by its Manager,
9th Floor, Discovery of India,
Dr.A.B.Road, Worli, Mumbai 400 018.
2.YES Bank Limited,
Rep. by its Manager,
Yes Bank Tower -2.
India Buils Finance Centre, 22nd Floor,
Senapati Bapat Road,
Elphinston West, Mumbai 400 013.
3.YES Bank Limited,
Rep. by its Manager (Credit Card),
Yes Bank Tower,
No.14, 3rd Main Road,
Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai 600 058. ......Opposite parties
Counsel for the complainant : M/s.J.Ram Kumar, Advocate.
Counsel for the opposite parties : M/s.RPR Law Associates.
This complaint is coming before us on various dates and finally on 24.01.2023 in the presence of M/s.J.Ram Kumar counsel for the complainant and upon perusing the documents and evidences of both sides, this Commission delivered the following:
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, PRESIDENT.
This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service with regard to the Credit Card transactions along with a prayer to direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant along with 24% interest from the date of complaint till the date of payment and cost of the proceedings.
Summary of the facts culminating into complaint:-
It was the case of the complainant that he was a credit card holder with YES Bank having credit card No.5318 4910 2359 0950 and thus availing credit card services from the opposite parties. The complainant complied with all the banking norms and service charges as sought by the opposite parties and had availed loans for a sum of Rs.1,13,000/-. He was paying his credit card loan amount properly in time. The complainant was working as Fire and Safety Officer, BHEL, Tirchy. In this situation on 06.04.2020 the complainant got a notification in bank statement for paying late payment fee. Immediately the complainant called the customer care but he did not get explanation. Finally the complainant contacted the YES Bank, Trichy directly on 26.05.2020 and questioned about the late payment fee Rs.700/- for which they replied that they are not reasonable. After several attempts the complainant contacted the Sales Manager to repay the balance loan amount and with great difficulty as per the request of the Sales Manager made balance loan amount to the tune of Rs.77,250/-. The complainant decided to close the credit card account and sent a mail to the opposite party on 29.06.2020. Even though the complainant had repaid the loan amount fully as per the advice of the opposite parties, the Bank officials were continuously threatening and forcing to repay the outstanding amount for cancelling the card without answering the complainant’s grievances. Despite repeated appeals by email and phone calls, there was no response from them. On 08.01.2021 the opposite parties sent a legal notice to the complainant mentioning to remit the entire outstanding amount of Rs.9,918.88/- as overdue credit card facility along with 24% interest per annum. An amount of Rs.11.897.99/- was due as on 06.03.2021 and the opposite parties insisted that the card would be cancelled only if the penalty amount was paid. On 21.01.2021 the complainant sent a proper reply notice and explained the issues. Transaction details stated in the Statement of Account are contraversial as the YES Bank debited the amount in the name of late payment fee, finance charges and COVID relief charges etc., without any prior intimation the opposite parties fraudulently. Due to continuous threatening of the opposite parties the complainant made an online complaint against the opposite parties and the same was registered by Tiruchirappalli Police Station vide Ref.No.RHM21034520 and an investigation was pending. Thus aggrieved by the act of the opposite parties the present complaint was filed to direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant along with 24% interest from the date of complaint till the date of payment and cost of the proceedings.
Crux of the defence put forth by the opposite parties:-
The opposite parties filed version disputing the complaint allegations contending interalia that the averments mentioned in the complaint was false, imaginary and concocted. The opposite parties approached the complainant to get a credit card was denied and it was submitted that if the complainant was not in requirement of credit card he could have refused the same. There was no compulsion on the part of the complainant or any pressure from the part of the opposite party to avail credit card. It was denied that the opposite party has asked him to pay Rs.77,250/- and that he paid it. The opposite party never intended to extract money by giving any false assurance to its customers. The interest accrued was only in view of the delay in repayment of the amount which the complainant is legally liable and bound to pay to the opposite party. As per the directions of RBI, the opposite party has given due credit of Rs.763.18/- on 13.08.2020 and Rs.211.19/- on 05.11.2020 towards reversal of charges accrued during the moratorium period. The complainant has not claimed anything beyond the terms of the agreement. Thus they sought for the complaint to be dismissed.
On the side of complainant proof affidavit was filed and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A18 were marked. Though the opposite parties filed written version they did not file any proof affidavit, written arguments and also did not adduce any oral arguments on their side.
Point for consideration:-
Whether the complaint was successful in proving that the act of opposite parties with regard to the Credit Card transactions amounts to deficiency in service by admissible evidence?
If so to what reliefs the complainant is entitled?
Point No.1:-
On the side of complainant the following documents were submitted in support of the complaint allegations;
Credit Card given by YES Bank was marked as Ex.A1;
Emails sent by the complainant was marked as Ex.A2;
Acknowledgement was marked as Ex.A3;
Reply mail sent by the opposite party was marked as Ex.A4;
Statement of Account was marked as Ex.A5;
Medical Report of the complainant was marked as Ex.A6;
Legal notice sent by the opposite parties to the complainant dated 08.01.2021was marked as Ex.A7;
Reply notice sent by the complainant to the opposite parties dated 21.01.2021 was marked as Ex.A8;
Remainder mail from Yes Bank to complainant was marked as Ex.A9;
Online complaint copy along with acknowledgement was marked as Ex.A10;
Call history details between the complainant and the opposite parties was marked as Ex.A11;
DVD of recorded Audio’s between complainant and the opposite parties customer care was marked as Ex.A12;
CSR.No.39/2021 given by Boiler Plant Police Station Trichy was marked as Ex.A13;
Summons issued by the Boiler Plant Police Station, Trichy Police station was marked as Ex.A14;
Summons issued by the Boiler Plant Police Station, Trichy Police station was marked as Ex.A15;
FIR Report in Crime No.215/2021 registered by Boiler Plant Police Station, Trichy was marked as Ex.A16;
Closure Report of FIR in Crime No.215/2021 and online complaint was marked as Ex.A17;
Direction given by the SCDRC, Chennai to represent the complaint before the DCDRC, Thiruvallur was marked as Ex.A18;
Complainant filed written arguments and represented that the same may be treated as oral arguments. On the side of opposite parties, they did not appear after filing written version and hence the evidence on their side was closed. As they did not file any written arguments or adduce oral arguments the arguments stage of opposite parties was also closed.
The crux of the written arguments filed by the complainant is that he was a Credit Card Holder and had availed Credit Card Loan from the opposite parties. On 06.04.2020 he got the Bank Statement for payment of late fee and when he called the Bank’s Customer Care he did not get any explanation. Finally, he contacted Yes Bank Tirchi and questioned about the late payment of fee Rs.700/-. After several attempts the Sales Manager advised him to pay the balance loan amount and then to send email questioning the late payment fee. With great difficulty the complainant paid Rs.77,250/-, then also there was no proper response from the opposite parties. On 08.01.2021 the opposite parties sent a legal notice to the complainant that there is an outstanding amount of Rs.9918.88/-as overdue for the Credit Card facility and as on 06.03.2021 the overdue reached Rs.11,897.99/-. But till the filing of complaint, no remedy was given by the opposite parties for the late payment fee charged for him. The moratorium announced by the RBI during COVID period was also not considered by the opposite parties. The opposite parties are continuously threatening the complainant to pay Rs.11,897.88/-. Thus it is submitted that the opposite parties are targeting persons to pay the outstanding loan stating that they will inform the CIBIL and also harass the Consumers with the help of collection agents which is totally against Law. Thus due to act the of opposite parties it is submitted that the complainant had sustained huge mental agony and thus sought for the complaint to be allowed.
On appreciation of the entire pleadings and materials produced before us we could infer that the complainant had obtained Credit Card Loan from the opposite parties and he was asked to pay the outstanding loan amount. Though no evidence, written arguments or oral arguments produced by the opposite parties they had stated in their version that the complainant had availed the Credit Card Loan at his own discretion and that if he did not require the Credit Card he could have refused the same. It was also stated that the increase in interest portion was only due to the delay in repayment. The defence raised by the opposite parties seems to be reasonable and acceptable. Further it is seen that as per directions of RBI they have given due credit of Rs.763.18/- on 13.08.2020 and Rs.211.19/- on 05.11.2020 toward reversal of charges accrued during moratorium period. In such facts and circumstances the opposite parties being financial institution providing financial assistance like Credit Card Loan etc., to the public like complainant insisting for repayment of the outstanding amount could not be termed as deficiency in service. The complainant had not produced any evidence to show that he was threatened illegally to make any payment outside the permitted amount to give cause of action for filing the present complaint. In such circumstances we hold that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Thus we answer the point accordingly in favour of the opposite parties and as against the complainant.
Point No.2:-
As we have held above that the complainant had failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, he is not entitled to any reliefs as claimed in the complaint from the opposite parties. Thus we answer the point accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to cost.
Dictated by the President to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 02nd day of February 2023.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
List of document filed by the complainant:-
Ex.A1 ............... Credit card given by Yes Bank. Xerox
Ex.A2 ............. Mail sent by complainant. Xerox
Ex.A3 ................ Acknowledgement. Xerox
Ex.A4 ............... Reply mail sent by the opposite party. Xerox
Ex.A5 ............. Statement of Accounts. Xerox
Ex.A6 ............ Medical report of the complainant. Xerox
Ex.A7 08.01.2021 Legal notice sent by the opposite party to complainant. Xerox
Ex.A8 21.01.2011 Reply notice sent by the complainant to opposite parties with acknowledgement. Xerox
Ex.A9 ............ Remainder mail from Yes Bank to complainant. Xerox
Ex.A10 ............ Online complaint along with acknowledgement. Xerox
Ex.11 .............. Call history details between the complainant and the opposite parties. Xerox
Ex.A12 .............. DVD of recorded Audio’s between complainant and the opposite parties customer care. Xerox
Ex.A13 23.06.2021 CSR.No.39/2021 given by Boiler Plant Police Station Trichy. Xerox
Ex.A14 19.06.2021 Summons issued by the Boiler Plant Police Station. Xerox
Ex.A15 19.07.2021 Summons issued by the Boiler Plant Police Station. Xerox
Ex.A16 20.07.2021 FIR Report in Crime No.215/2021 registered by Boiler Plant Police Station, Trichy. Xerox
Ex.A17 21.07.2021 Closure Report of FIR in Crime No.215/2021 and online complaint. Xerox
Ex.A18 07.09.2021 Direction given by the SCDRC, Chennai to represent the complaint before the DCDRC, Thiruvallur. Xerox
List of document filed the opposite parties:-
-Nil-
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT
