DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)

Consumer Complaint No.491 of 2016

                                                Date of institution:  17.08.2016                                              Date of decision   :  22.11.2021

Gurnaib Singh Brar son of Shri H.S. Brar, resident of House No.2607, Sector 47-C, Chandigarh.

…….Complainant

Versus

1.     HDFC Bank Cards Division, Prince Khushal Towers, 96, Anna Salai, Chennai 600002 through its Branch Manager/ authorized representative.

2.     HDFC Bank Cards Division, SCF No.50-51, Second Floor, Phase-3B2, Mohali-160061 through its Branch Manager/ authorized representative.

                                                      ……..Opposite Parties        

Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.

Quorum:   Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

                Ms. Gagandeep Gosal,  Member

Present:    Complainant in person.

Shri Tushar Arora, Advocate vice Shri Sandeep Suri, counsel for the OPs.

Order dictated by :-  Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

Order

               The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred as ‘OPs’ for short), on the ground that the CC is a retired Senior Manager from M/s. Fun Multiplex Pvt. Ltd.  and had subscribed credit card facility vide credit card No.4346771001712208. It is further averred that the CC received an offer for full and final settlement of credit card account No.4346771001712208 from OP No.1 vide settlement offer dated 23.08.2004. The CC duly agreed and issued following three cheques aggregating Rs.15,500/- in favour of OP No.1:

                It is further averred that all the aforesaid three cheques were duly encashed by OP No.1 in lieu of settlement offer. Despite the settlement and encashment of all the cheques, the OPs issued a legal notice dated 06.10.2019 to the CC under Section 62 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 alleging that the CC has failed to make payment of the outstanding amount to the tune of Rs.15,856.40 as on 06.10.2009. The CC also attended the Conciliation Camp organized at HDFC Bank Cards Division, Phase 3B2, Mohali and apprised the concerned officials  about the full and final settlement arrived at between the parties and also produced copy of statement of his bank account No.01071050044660 as per which payment of Rs.15,500/- was made vide aforesaid three cheques. It is further averred that OP No.2 gave assurance to the CC that the matter will be looked into. However, the CC received another legal notice dated 20.04.2016 wherein it was mentioned that there was continuous failure/refusal on behalf of the CC to clear the outstanding dues to the tune of Rs.29121.99 on 20.04.2016.  It is further averred that as per demand dated 20.04.2016 which was computer generated, it was stated that information pertaining to credit card of the CC has been shared with other banks, institutions, Credit Information Companies and Statutory bodies.; besides the account of CC was also assigned to external associates of the bank for the purpose of liaising with the CC for payment of dues.  It is further averred that on account of persistent failure of OP No.1 to acknowledge the fact that the CC had duly paid the outstanding amount of Rs.15,500/-, the CC sent a legal notice dated 27.05.2016 through his counsel to the OPs. However, no remedial steps have been taken by the OPs.

                Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the CC has sought directions to the OPs to pay him Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for loss of reputation, mental agony and harassment. The CC has further demanded Rs.5,500/- towards cost of legal notice and Rs.22,000/- towards cost of filing the consumer complaint.  The complaint of the CC is duly signed and verified. Further the same is also supported by affidavit of the CC.

2.             In reply OPs have raised a number of preliminary objections by stating that as per the CC himself; in 2009 he was aware of the fact that the bank has called him to clear the outstanding dues. The CC had not disputed at any stage that the fresh demand of the principal amount inclusive of interest was Rs.15,856/- on 06.10.2019 and it increased on account of accrual of interest.  The CC cannot be permitted now to raise the dispute after a period of 12 years from the alleged one time settlement.  The offer was not accepted by the CC hence the said OTS did not come into force.  However, for the purpose of amicably settling the matter, the OPs are still ready to consider the amount paid against the OTS letter and close the account as settled in terms of the communication. The CC has not sought any relief except for compensation. When there is no relief in respect of credit card dues, then there is no occasion for grant of compensation or any other expenses as has been prayed for. Thus, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             The CC in support of his complaint submitted his affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 and documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5. On the other hand, OPs have tendered in evidence affidavit of Shri Anand Swami, Manager Legal as Ex.OP-1/1 and closed its evidence.

6.             We have heard the complainant and Shri Tushar Arora, Advocate vice Shri Sandeep Suri, counsel for the OPs and have perused the record.

7.             From the perusal of entire file, it is writ large that apart from praying for compensation by the CC, no substantive relief has been sought by the CC. It is pertinent to mention here that the CC in this case is not seeking any relief regarding his credit card or any dues pending against him which allegedly have already been paid by him. The CC is simply seeking compensation and expenses incurred on account of some legal notice served on him by the OPs and for filing the present complaint. It is specifically mentioned by the OPs in their written arguments that for the purpose of amicably settling the matter, the OPs are ready to consider the amount paid by the CC against the one time settlement letter as has been claimed by the CC and close the account as settled in terms of that settlement. We feel, that this Commission cannot make out a case which is not pleaded by the CC. The CC has not sought any relief regarding his credit card or has not challenged the veracity of the legal notice rather has sought only compensation.                  

10.           In view of our above discussion, the present complaint is dismissed. However, no order is made as to costs. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. Thereafter, the file be consigned to record room.

Announced

November 22, 2021

                                                                (Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)

                                                                President

                                                       I agree.

(Ms. Gagandeep Gosal)

Member