DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI
C.C.NO.16 OF 2021
Date of Filing : 08.03.2021
Date of Order : 25.10.2022
Sri. Prakash Chandra Tripathy
S/O: Late Kambupani Tripathy
Resident of Masterpada, Dhipashi
PO/PS- Phulbani Town,
Dist- Kandhamal. …………………….. Complainant.
Versus.
SBI Cards & Payments Services
DLF Infinity Tower, Tower C, 12th Floor
Block-2, Building -3, DLF Cyber City
PO- Gurgaon- 122002
State- Haryana(India) …………………….. Opp. Party.
Present: Sri Purna Chandra Mishra - President.
Sri Sudhakar Senapothi - Member.
For the Complainant: None
For O.P.- None
JUDGEMENT
Mr. Purna Chandra Mishra, President
Complainant Prakash Chandra Tripathy has filed this case u/s 35 of the C.P Act 2019 alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P for claiming a sum of Rs.2700.44/- without providing him any credit card and praying therein for a direction to the O.P not to claim any charge towards credit card and not to make adverse remark in CIBIL.
- Brief fact leading to the case is that the petitioner received an SMS from MCMS for overdue amount of Rs. 2700.44/- towards credit card issued from State Bank Of India credit card division bearing card no. 0005126229210672823. The credit card was not received by the complainant and has never been used by him and he came to know about the card only after opening the link given in the SMs
2. Notice was duly served on the O.P on dated 14.06.2022 as seen from the postal tracking report filed before this Commission. The O.P preferred not to appear and challenge the allegation raised against him.
3. The petitioner in support of his case has filed the copies of the SMS received by him copy of the Email sent to Chairman SBI.
4. It is seen from the documents on record that the petitioner has sent and complaint to the Chairman SBI by e-mail on 25.02.2021 but no reply has been received by him except a telephone call from the Nodal Officer. There is nothing on record shows that the credit card has been delivered to the complainant and he has used it and after repayment a sum of Rs.2700.44/- is outstanding in his account. The complainant clearly denies that he has not received the credit card in question and we believe the allegation of the complainant that the O.P in spite of notice served on him preferred not to appear or challenge allegation in any manner. Claiming of over-due charge without issuing a credit card to a customer and not rectifying their defects after lodging of complaint amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service as well. The O.P kept the petitioner in constant tension as he apprehends that his name may be posted in the CIBIL list. As a case of deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and harassment is made out against the O.P he is liable to compensate the petitioner for the harassment caused to him and hence the order.
ORDER
The complaint petition is allowed ex-parte against the O.P. The O.P is liable for causing deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and harassment to the complainant. The O.P.is directed not to claim a sum of Rs.2700.44/- from the complainant. The O.P is further directed any other claim against credit card no. 0005126229210672823 and to ensure that the name of the complainant is not displayed in the CIBIL list .The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00000/-(One lakhs only)towards compensation for deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and unnecessary harassment and a sum of Rs.20,000/-towards cost of litigation.
I Agree
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pronounced in the open Commissioner today on this 25th day of October 2022 in the presence of the parties.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
