DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 21^st day of March  2023.                                                                                             

                           Filed on: 25/02/2016

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                            President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                               Member Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                               Member                

C.C No. 130/2016

COMPLAINANT

          Mr. Tom Joseph, Proprietor, M/s Bloodline corporation, V11/475-8, N   MRA-41, Mavelipuram, Kakkanad, Cochin.

(By Adv.Isac Ninan, Associated Lawyers, Appu Soudam, Valanjambalam, Ernakulam, Kochi-16)

VS

OPPOSITE PARTIES

(Op1 rep. by Adv.Jithesh Menon)

2). M/s SBICPSL, PO Bag No.24, GPO, New Delhi-110 00.India Represented by its Manager.

4). M/s GE Capital World Wide, 37/997, Floor, Aryabhangi building Sahodaran Ayyappan Road, Elamkulam, Cochi-20. Rep. by its Manager

(Op. 2 to 4 rep. by Adv.Rajesh Thomas, High Court of Kerala, 41/3792, C2, First Floor, Carmel Centre, Banerji Road, Kochi-682 018)

F I N A L   O R D E R

D.B. Binu, President.

1)       A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

          The complaint was filed under Section 12 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. The brief facts, as averred in the complaint, are that the complainant herein was the holder of an SBI Credit card with No.4317575015806020. He is a businessman who celebrated 25 years in his field. The 1^st opposite party is a reputed public undertaking bank and it has branches all over India. Credit cards is promoted by SBI, and is under its and direction and control. It is collecting the payments and dues through its branches, all over India. The subsidiary unit of SBI Cards is promoted and conducted by the 1^st  opposite party, which is fully managed by the SBI. The 4^th opposite party is another agency appointed on behalf of the 1^st opposite party, for collecting money including service charges and doing other services for the customers, though they are doing it differently. The complainant opted for SBI Credit cards only for the reason that it was promoted by SBI and is managed by the SBI. Using the SBI Credit card with No.4317575015806020, the complainant has transactions till June 2003.  At last fed up with the style of functioning, the complainant proposed the 4^th opposite party for that purpose. On 30.03.2004 for and on behalf of other opposite parties, 4^th  opposite party agreed for the closure of the credit card account, on payment of Rs.15,000/- in three equal installments of Rs.5,000/- each. For and on behalf, it was also agreed and assured that, on the realization of the offer letter to close the installment of Rs.5,000/-, an official account will be issued. agent The complainant agreed with the opposite parties' proposal and as part of compliance of the same a cheque bearing No.467908, for an amount of Rs 5000/-, drawn on Vijaya Bank, MG Road Branch, Ernakulum was handed over to the first the opposite party on 30-03-2004 and this cheque was honoured on 5-4-2004. The complainant paid the first instalment but the opposite party had not issued the official offer letter for the closure of the account. On the complainant's enquiry, he came to know that this is a regular practice followed by the bank and its agent. So, on 7-6-04, the complainant again contacted the opposite party and at their assurance, for settling and closing the dues of the credit card account and closure letter, the complainant issued, two post-dated cheques bearing No.440709 and 440710, for the amount of Rs 5000/- each, drawn on Vijaya Bank, MG Road Branch, Ernakulum. It was handed over to the opposite party on 7-6-2004. These cheques were honoured respectively on 31-7-04 and 1-9-04. On 9-6-2004, the payment collection Department of SBI Credit cards, Kochi, acknowledged the receipt of these cheques and return of the original and the expired credit cards, in the covering letter issued by the complainant. After July 2003, there were no transactions made using the credit cards, and the entire due amount was settled and paid as stated above and the original credit card was returned. However, after two years, when some persons claimed as collection agents/ collection executives of SBI Credit card, demanded a huge amount and threatened the complainant with dire consequences and they were using filthy language. So, in the compelling circumstance, the complainant contacted the SBI Credit card Collection office and appraised the matter to them. Then the office acknowledged the return of the credit card, the connected cheques, and papers and tempted oral apology for the act of "goons" appointed by the agents as collection agents/ collection executives, to ensure the maximum profit by squeezing the customer, as part of the business by an agency, which was benefited by the superior officials of the bank, and assured that there will be no trouble in future. After about 9 years, i.e., in the year 2012, the so-called "goons" acting as collection agents/ collection executives of SBI Credit card, by telephone, demanded a huge amount, i.e., more than Rs 100000/- and offered to settle the amount for Rs 23000/- and threatened the complainant and his family members with a dire consequence, if not settled. Even the lady members are not spared and the "goons" acting as collection agents/collection executives are using abusive and filthy language. Unbearable with acts of these "goons" the complainant issued a letter dated 4-12.17 to Mr. Vincent D' Cruz, SBI Cards, GE Capital Ltd, Kurisupally Lane, Ernakulum. through E-mail Id vincentdecruz307 @gmail.com. Mr. D'cruz received the same at 2.58 pm on the same day. In the email, it was required the details of the statement for the required payments and requested to email to the same in client E. mail ID

          The complainant had approached this Commission seeking an order directing the opposite parties to close the SBI Credit card account with No.4317575015806020 and issue the closure letter and remove the complainants name from the published CIBIL defaulters/creditors list, to pay an amount of Rs 10,00000/- to the complainant, as damages caused to the complainant due to the publication of his name in the CBIL statement, caused mental agony to the complainant. and the cost of the proceedings.

2). Notices

          Notices were issued from the Commission to the opposite parties. The opposite parties received the notice and filed their versions.

3)       Version of the 1^st opposite party

          The SBI Card no is 4317 5750 1580 6020 was allotted in the name of Tom Joseph, Basis Application submitted from the applicant by sourcing the KYC documents.  The averment in the Para 4 is denied as to submit that the card account has been receiving partial payments on complainant’s card account, as against the total amount due payable on Card account. Therefore, the card account was levied with late payment and finance charge. Hence averment in the Para 5 is denied as to submit that the card account has been receiving partial payments on complainant’s card account, as against the total amount due payable on Card account. Therefore, the card account was levied with late payment and finance charges. Hence it is also submitted that the card holder has not entered in to any settlement. Hence, it's not in a position to provide the waiver of entire outstanding on your SBI card account. As on date, your account has an outstanding balance of Rs.100797.80/-Further, we would request you to please make the payment of Rs.100797.80 before next payment due date in order to zeroise your SBI Card account.  We also submit that we can settle the account and the CIBIL Clean-up can be given for Rs19870 in 1 shot. Request share CH's consent for further processing. The Complaint under reply is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as no prima facie case has been made out against the answering the opposite party. It is evident that the Complaint has been filed by the Complainant with some oblique motives in an endeavour to force the answering the opposite party to accept certain illegal demand of the Complainant, which the answering the opposite party are otherwise not liable.

4). Evidence

          The complainant had filed a proof affidavit and 6 documents that were marked as Exhibits-A-1- to A-6.

Exbt.A1       : copy of covering letter dated 09.06.2004 to the Payment                                       Collection Department of SBI regarding the closure of credit card                            account of the complainant.

Exbt.A2       : copy of acknowledgement dated 02.05.2006

Exbt.A3       : copy of the E-mail sent to

Exbt.A4       : copy of   the Notice dated 24-10-15 to opposite parties. 
(Marked as Exbt.A1 series, Exbt.A2 series, Exbt.A3 series and Exbt.A4 series)

Exbt.A5       :: copy of   the Acknowledgement dated 30.03.2004

Exbt.A6       : copy of postal receipts.

5) The main points to be analysed in this case are as follows:

i)        Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?

ii)       Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the    side of the opposite party to the complainant?

iii)      If so, whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief from the side of      the opposite party?

iv)      Costs of the proceedings if any?

6)       The issues mentioned above are considered together and are        answered as follows:

     As per Section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986, a consumer is a person who buys any goods or hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment. The complainant produced true copies of the recorded closure of credit card account and it covering letter issued by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant. (Exhibits A-1 and A-2). Hence, the complainant is a consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (Point No. i) goes against the opposite parties.

                The counsel for the complainant submitted that the ulterior motive behind this is very clear from the opposite party's subsequent conduct. The opposite party's pressure tactics, the complainant’s name was shown as a defaulter in the CIBIL statement, which was available for verification. In fact, there were no dues and the entire accounts were settled in the year 2004. By showing the complainant as a creditor, his future chances to raise loans for his business purpose are spoiled. As the publication of the complainant’s name in the CIBIL statement, a public document, damages were caused to him. The circumstance of taking immediate steps to delete the complainant’s name from the list of creditors as published in the CBIL statement and for damages caused to him in that account and for damages caused to him, due to the publication of his name in the CBIL statement, a public document, and also for the illegal acts which made complainant and his family members life miserable, a notice dated 24-10-2015 was issued to the opposite party and claiming an amount of Rs 10,00000/- on different heads with notice expense of Rs 3500/-. All the parties in the proceedings received the notice and to date, it was not complied or not even responded which shows that the  opposite party is not opposing the claim of the  customer/complainant and there is fault and deficiency in the service required by the service provider.  The claim made by the consumer is repudiated by the service provider and the grievance still exists and damages caused to the consumer are now continuing. There is the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and the consumer is suffering from it.

               The counsel for the opposite parties  submitted that the Complaint does not qualify the ingredients of a valid Complaint as envisaged in Section 2 (c) of the Consumer Protect Act, 1986, as such the Complaint is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.  The complainant is bound by the jurisdiction set forth in the agreement executed between himself and SBI Cards and payment Service (P) Ltd.  This is matter of record that, as per card holder agreement there is an arbitration clause, which stipulates that in all events of dispute/difference between the card holder and the SBI Cards, the same shall be resolved by appointment of a sole arbitrator and the opposite party shall have the powers to appoint the arbitrator. As such this commission is devoid of jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the complainant is bound by the terms and conditions which were supplied to him along with a book let through a welcome kit before the complainant had made any transaction through the service on the part of the opposite party and complainant being a defaulter cannot allege deficiency in service of credit card.

          The Commission upon verifying the documents produced from either side and on hearing both sides orders as follows.

O R D E R

          Since the complainant could not have succeeded in proving that he had undergone deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party without doubt and fairly well and also since there is no proof or evidences to substantiate the case produced before this Commission, we find the issues (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) are not in favour of the complainant. The Commission do not have any fair reason to allow the case on merit and therefore the consumer complaint is dismissed.

Pronounced in the open Commission on this the 21^st day of March 2023.

Sd/-

                                                                             D.B.Binu President

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Sd/-                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   V.Ramachandran Member

                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                             Sreevidhia T.N., Member

                                                                                                                                Forwarded by Order

                                                                             Assistant Registrar

APPENDIX

Complainant’s Evidence

Exbt.A1       : copy of covering letter dated 09.06.2004 to the Payment                                       Collection Department of SBI regarding the closure of credit card                            account of the complainant.

Exbt.A2       : copy of acknowledgement dated 02.05.2006

Exbt.A3       : copy of the E-mail sent to

Exbt.A4       : copy of   the Notice dated 24-10-15 to opposite parties. 
(Marked as Exbt.A1 series, Exbt.A2 series, Exbt.A3 series and Exbt.A4 series)

Exbt.A5       :: copy of   the Acknowledgement dated 30.03.2004

Exbt.A6       : copy of postal receipts.