State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Bijay Kumar Dash vs Citibank N.A. on 24 March, 2009
IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI (Constituted under section 9 clause (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of decision: 24.03.2009 Complaint Case No.2008/295 Sh. Bijay Kumar Dash Complainant L-3, Lajpat Nagar-III in person. New Delhi. Versus 1. Citibank N.A. . Opposite Parties Citibank Centre, 5th Floor, through Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai. 2. Regional Manager, Citibank N.A. Global Consumer Bank, Jeevan Bharti Building, 124, Connaught Circus, New Delhi. CORAM: Justice J.D. Kapoor, ... President Ms. Rumnita Mittal Member
1. Whether reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
Justice J.D. Kapoor, President(ORAL)
1. The matter is listed today for amicable settlement on the representation of the OP Bank. Complainant is seeking compensation for mental agony and harassment on the ground that inspite of having settled the dispute against the credit card full and final by way of final payment of Rs.348/- vide cheque No.333338 dated 27.10.2006 drawn on SBI, the OP started again sending bills after bills and so much so they have put him on the defaulters list of all the banks and therefore has caused irreparable damage to his reputation as banks have refused to give him loan.
2. The complainant worked as Chief Protocol and Public Relations Officer at AIIMS and retried in the year 2007 and therefore is widely respected for character and public dealings. There is no doubt the complainant has suffered mental agony, harassment and emotional suffering and also loss of reputation in terms of credibility for raising loan.
3. We have deprecated this practice that inspite of there being no proof of any transaction done by the customer and inspite of having settled the matter fully OP continued sending bills. We have also taken a view that by putting name of the credit card holder in the list of defaulters amounts to unfair trade practice. It is defamatory as bank has no business to take its dispute with the customer to other banks and tell that he is defaulter and therefore loan should not be given. We have directed the banks not to reject the loan on the basis of defaulters list and peruse and scan the credibility of a person on its own. We have also sent these direction to RBI Governor.
4. The OP has now agreed to withdraw the name of the complainant from defaulters list and they will also issue a formal letter of No Dues Certificate and pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant. The OP shall comply aforesaid assurances within 15 days. The payment shall be made within 15 days.
5. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced today on 24th day of March 2009.
(Justice J.D. Kapoor) President (Rumnita Mittal) Member Tri