Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/140/2019

M.S. Randhawa - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI Card - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

25 Nov 2019

ORDER

        STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

 

 

Appeal No.	:	140 of 2019
Date of Institution	:	11.07.2019
Date of Decision	:	25.11.2019

 

Sh. M. S. Randhawa son of Sardar Gurdev Singh resident of House No.664, Sector 33-B, Chandigarh, Aged 67 years.

 

…….Appellant/Complainant.

Versus

 

1. S.B.I. Card, DLF Infinity Towers, Tower-C, 10^th-12^th Floor, Block-2, Building-3, DLF Cyber City, Gurugram 122002, Haryana through its Chief Executive Officer.
2. S.B.I. Card, SCO no.171-172, Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh through its Authorized Person/Authority.
3. Credit Information Bureau (India) Limited (CIBIL), Head Office at Transunion CIBIL Limited, One India Bulls, 19^th Floor, Tower-2-A-2B, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elephinstone Road, Mumbai 400013 through its Authorized Person/Authority.

 

...Respondents/Opposite Parties.

 

Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

 

BEFORE: JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT.

                MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER.

                MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER.

       

Argued by:

 

Sh. M. S. Randhwa, appellant in person.

Er. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for respondents No.1 & 2.

Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No.3.

 

PER  RAJESH  K.  ARYA, MEMBER

                   This appeal has been filed by the complainant against order dated 13.05.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (in short ‘the Forum’) vide which, his consumer complaint bearing No.578 of 2018 was dismissed by the Forum. While dismissing the complaint, the Forum observed in Paras 5 to 9 of its judgment as under:-

“5]       The entire evidence on record produced by the parties as well as the pleadings on record, explicitly proves that the complainant M.S.Radhawa along with Gurmitinder Randhawa, jointly took 27 Loans under the following accounts (Ann.C-8):-

Account Numbers	Bank
51106016000117	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108011001192	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015003269	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015003086	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51105015002848	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015002827	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015002393	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015002415	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015001778	Oriental Bank of Commerce
00389031000129	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51106515001338	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51106515001272	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51104015001152	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000973	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51105015000962	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000941	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000918	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000686	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000699	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000645	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000439	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51106511000349	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108011001086	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51105011000897	Oriental Bank of Commerce
07445101000062	Oriental Bank of Commerce
51108015000385	Oriental Bank of Commerce

 6]       Out of the said 27 Loan Accounts, one was still stands overdue and the balance outstanding amount of Rs.20,67,654/-, stands due as on 25.9.2018 (Ann.C-8 Page–9).

 7]       Besides the above mentioned loan accounts, the complainant was also holding one add on credit Card bearing No.0004006661015852580, which was issued against credit card of Vikram Randhawa, primary credit card holder bearing No.4377484634124989.

 8]       The OPs No.1 & 2/SBI Credit Card through its letter dated 2.10.2018 considered the request of the complainant regarding settlement of overdue payment of Rs.2879/- as a matter of consumer friendly relationship and has waived of the said outstanding amount and zeroised the credit card account of the complainant.  The letter dated 2.10.2018 issued by SBI Credit Cards conveying the apology/regret over the inconvenience faced by the complainant by pursuing his request to zeroided the credit card account, ipso-facto is not sufficient enough to hold the OPs/SBI Credit Card Limited responsible for any updating of financial transactions in the name of the complainant. 

9]       The complainant, as per Data Base Information (Ann.C-2 Page-15) was on error in making late payment on 30 occasions.  He has sought nine enquiries to obtain his CIBIL Report, which is also contributed in lower CIBIL score in favour of the complainant.  The information available in CIBIL with respect to all financial transactions of loan outstanding liabilities contributes towards assessment of CIBIL Score, for which any institution alone cannot be held responsible, rather it is an individual himself, who is sole responsible for his high or low CIBIL score, which is based on his own financial conduct.”

2.                     However, we are not convinced with the finding given by the Forum on the basis of two documents i.e. Annexures C-6 and C-7 produced in evidence before the Forum by the complainant. Annexure C-6 is the copy of complaint dated 29.09.2018 given by the complainant to the Chief Executive Officer, SBI Credit Card, Gurgaon with its copies to Principal Nodal Officer, SBI Credit Card, Gurgaon and Senior Manager – Customer Service, Chandigarh.

3.                In the aforesaid complaint (Annexure C-6), the complainant specifically stated that as he had applied for housing loan from Oriental Bank, Sector 33, Chandigarh, he was informed that his CIBIL Score has come down due to default in making payment of credit card. It was also informed by the complainant that he never applied for SBI Credit Card in 1999 and asked to supply certain documents/clarification at the earliest. It was also clarified by the complainant that he was issued add on card in the year 2013 and the primary card holder was Vikram Randhawa whose card number was 4377484634124989. The complainant further asked to let him know his card number as the same was surrendered by him on 07.07.2015 by making full and final payment of Rs.16,280/- through cheque no.016611 of Oriental Bank of Commerce.

4.                In response to aforesaid complaint dated 29.09.2018 of the complainant, the Customer Service Team – SBI Card replied vide its email dated 02.10.2018 (Annexure C-7), wherein, they informed that the complainant as under:-

“At the outset, we understand the concern expressed in your communication and empathize with the difficulties faced by you.

We wish to inform you that we have zeroised the card outstanding of Rs.2,879.27 which was due on the card. Please be advised, the outstanding will be NIL in the next month statement.

Further, please be advised, we have also forwarded your request to the concerned team to retrieve the card application and we shall update you within 7 working days.

We would appreciate your patience and cooperation in the interim.

Please accept our sincere apologies towards discomfort caused to you in this regard.”

5.                Once opposite parties No.1 & 2 tendered their sincere apologies towards discomfort caused to the complainant, the finding of the Forum that it ipso-facto  was not sufficient enough to hold the opposite parties/SBI Credit Card Limited responsible for any updating of financial transactions in the name of the complainant is not well versed. In case, both the card i.e. the primary in the name of Vikram Randhawa and the add on card in the name of the complainant were surrendered and there was nothing due against these cards, opposite parties No.1 & 2 were not to report the case to CIBIL on 30.08.2018 i.e. after a period of 18 years of the account becoming NPA as shown on the CIBIL website. As per status report dated 25.09.2018 (Annexure C-8), CIBIL score of the complainant was shown as 597, which was treated as poor, whereas, the email communication dated 19.11.2018 (Annexure R-2), placed on record by opposite party No.3, clearly stated that the current balance and amount overdue are both ‘zero’. Adverse score was shown with opposite party No.3 only on the basis of wrong information provided by opposite parties No.1 & 2. It is only after the complainant making a detailed complaint to opposite parties No.1 & 2, they zeroised the card outstanding only vide letter dated 02.10.2018 (Annexure C-7), which is definitely an unfair trade practice on their part. Thus, it is a case of incorrect reporting by opposite parties No.1 & 2 and it is clear and apparent that neither there is any outstanding dues payable by the complainant to opposite parties No.1 & 2 nor there is any liability towards opposite parties No.1 & 2. The complainant suffered a lot on account of poor CIBIL Score as he had applied for a housing loan from Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sector 33, Chandigarh, which also defamed his position qua his paying capacity and financial status. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 very easily tendered apology but they did not think that what kind of loss to the repudiation of the complainant they had caused by listing his status at the CIBIL website, which lowered his CIBIL Score and reduced his limit of obtaining any kind of loan, big or small, from any financial institutions. Sanctioning loan by any financial institution depends upon his CIBIL Score. Thus, in our considered opinion, as stated above, opposite parties No.1 & 2 are deficient in doing so and are liable to compensate the complainant on this count.

6.                In views of above, an amount of Rs.50,000/-, if granted as compensation, to the complainant, would meet the ends of justice and will also cater for harassment and mental agony suffered by him due to deficiency in rendering service on the part of opposite parties No.1 & 2.

7.                For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 13.05.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh, dismissing consumer complaint bearing No.578 of 2018, is set aside. Consumer Complaint bearing No.578 of 2018 is partly allowed against respondents No.1 & 2/opposite parties No.1 & 2 and they are jointly and severally, directed as under:-

1. To pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- to the appellant/complainant as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him due to deficiency in rendering service and unfair trade practice on the part of respondents No.1 & 2/opposite parties No.1 & 2, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which, the aforesaid amount shall carry interest @12% per annum, from the date of filing the complaint till actual realization.
2. To pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the appellant/complainant as costs of litigation, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which, the aforesaid amount shall carry interest @12% per annum, from the date of filing the complaint till actual realization.

8.             However, Consumer Complaint bearing No.578 of 2018 stands dismissed against respondent No.3/opposite party No.3 with no order as to costs.

9.                Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.

10.              The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

Pronounced                                                                                          

25.11.2019.

[JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

 

 

(PADMA PANDEY)

        MEMBER

 

 

(RAJESH  K. ARYA)

MEMBER

Ad