Haryana

StateCommission

A/144/2016

HITENDRAPAL SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK - Opp.Party(s)

BY POST

05 Dec 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

 

First Appeal No  :      144 of 2016

Date of Institution:     15.02.2016

Date of Decision :      05.12.2017

 

 

Hitendrapal Singh son of Sh. T.P. Singh, resident of House No.18, Adarsh Nagar, Extn. Kheria Bye Pass, Agra-282001.

                                      Appellant-Complainant

 

Versus

 

1.      Standard Chartered Bank through its Manager, SCF 77, Sector 14, Gurgaon.

 

2.      Standard Chartered Bank through its Managing Director, Head Office 90, Mahatama Gandhi Road, Mumbai-400001

 

3.      Priya Krishna Prakash, Head Customer Care, Standard Chartered Bank, Customer Care Unit, 19, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600001.

                                      Respondents-Opposite Parties

 

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri Balbir Singh, Judicial Member.                          

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.

 

 

Present:               Shri Hitendrapal Singh, appellant in person

                             Shri S.K. Bhoria, Advocate for the respondents alongwith Shri Bikram Singh, Manager Collection, Standard Chartered Bank, Ludhiana.

         

                                                   O R D E R

 

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

          This complainant’s (Hitendrapal Singh) appeal is directed against the order dated December 11^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gurgaon (for short, ‘District Forum’) whereby complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was dismissed.

2.      It was the case of the complainant that he had Saving Account No.53510034432 in Standard Chartered Bank, Gurgaon (for short, ‘Bank’).  It was opened in the month of May, 2005.  On September 12^th, 2008 the bank debited Rs.2,55,927.84 from the said account on account of CRCD payment Mail ATTA, which was the alleged amount accrued on the Visa Executive Card No.4129047381087377 purported to have been issued by the bank to him.  As per the bank, the credit limit was Rs.25,000/- and the remaining was the interest accrued thereon from time to time.  He sent reminders through emails dated November 07^th, 2008 and October 16^th, 2010 to the bank wherein it was stated by him that since he had never applied for the Visa Executive Card nor received any credit card, so, question of using the said credit card by him did not arise.

3.      In its written version, the bank pleaded that since an amount of Rs.2,55,927.84 was due, so, the balance was set off by debiting the account of complainant towards credit card dues by September 05^th, 2008. 

4.      After hearing the complainant and the learned counsel for the bank assisted by its Manager, the issue involved in this case is as to whether the bank had issued Visa Executive Card to the complainant or not?

5.      It is pertinent to mention here that vide orders dated June 03^rd, 2016, February 02^nd, 2017, April 02^nd, 2017 and September 22^nd, 2017, the bank was directed to place on record the documents whereby Visa Executive Card was issued to the complainant and also to show the cheque through which the payment was made by the complainant in his Visa Executive Card Account as mentioned in the credit card statement (Annexure OP-B) issued by the bank.  The manager of the bank has placed on record photocopies of the (i) Application Covering Evaluation Summary (ACES) (ii)          Verification Report (iii) Pay Slip issued by ACCEL ICIM Systems and Services Limited (iv) Appointment Letter (v) Application Form for the Global Standard Chartered Credit Card and (vi) Residence Verification.

6.      The Manager has also made a statement at bar that except the aforesaid documents, the bank has no document to prove that Visa Executive Card was issued to the complainant.  It is also made clear that copy of the cheque whereby payment of Rs.300/- was allegedly made by the complainant in his credit card account was not placed on record and the bank has not placed any document to prove that the cheque was issued by the complainant and anybody else. 

7.      The aforesaid documents placed on record by the bank have been perused.  In the Application Covering Evaluation Summary (ACES), the name of the person is mentioned as H.P. Singh.  It does not bear the signature of the complainant.  The date mentioned underneath the signatures of the alleged applicant is also scored one.  There is over cutting against the column PRIM Card in the Application Covering Evaluation Summary.  The verification report bears no detail of the complainant except his name.  There is a pay slip allegedly of the complainant but it is a photocopy.  There is also an application form for the Global Standard Chartered Credit Card.  It also does not bear the signatures of complainant.  Of course his name is mentioned Hitendra Pal Singh.  The another document, that is, salary package allegedly pertaining to complainant sent by Verghese Jacob, Director, alleged employer of the complainant, the name is mentioned Jitendra Pal Singh.  The matter could be resolved in a very simple manner, had the bank produced the relevant documents whereby the credit card was issued to the complainant and the payment whatsoever was made by the complainant through cheque in the said account by placing on record the photocopies of the cheque because it could be verified from those documents that the said cheques were issued by the complainant or not which the bank did not produce inspite of number of opportunities granted to it. 

8.      The District Forum dismissed the complaint on the short ground that the bank had powers to set off the loan whereas the issue involved was as to whether the Executive Visa Card was issued to the complainant or not?

9.      For the reasons recorded supra, this Commission holds that the Executive Visa Card was never issued to the complainant and as such, the amount of Rs.2,55,927.84 was wrongly debited by the bank from the account of complainant.  Thus, the appeal is accepted, impugned order is set aside and the complaint is allowed.  Resultantly, the bank is directed to credit Rs.2,55,927.84 in the saving account of the complainant alongwith interest duly paid by the bank on the saving account from September 12^th, 2008 till payment.  The bank is also directed to pay Rs.25,000/- to the complainant towards harassment, which he meted out on account of fault on the part of bank.  The entire amount be paid by the bank within a period of 30 days, from the date of receipt of the order, otherwise, it will carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum till realization. 

 

 

Announced 05.12.2017

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(Balbir Singh) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President