State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Vikash Kumar Singh vs The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corpn. ... on 18 March, 2016
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 Complaint Case No. CC/127/2012 1. Vikash Kumar Singh S/o Sri Ram Chandra Prasad Singh, 389/1, Flat 1B, Urbi Apartment, Dum Dum Park, Kolkata - 700 055. 2. Rameswar Prasad Singh S/o Sri Ram Chandra Prasad Singh, 389/1, Flat 1B, Urbi Apartment, Dum Dum Park, Kolkata - 700 055. ...........Complainant(s) Versus 1. The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corpn. Ltd. 31, BBD Bagh, Dalhousie Square, Kolkata - 700 001 also at 96, Dr. Radha Krishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennari-600 004. 2. Credit Information Bureau(India) Limited (CIBIL) Hoechst House, 6th Floor, 193, Backbay Reclamation, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021. ............Opp.Party(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KALIDAS MUKHERJEE PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY MEMBER For the Complainant: Mr. Rajdeep Biswas, Advocate For the Opp. Party: None appears ORDER 18.03.2016 MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY, HON'BLE MEMBER
The facts, leading to the instant Complaint filed u/s 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, are, in short, that the Complainant No. 1 obtained a Credit Card from the OP No. 1-Bank, but after sometime the Complainant No. 1 requested the OP No. 1-Bank, after repayment of all the charges due allegedly for levying unjustified charges by the OP No. 1-Bank, to close the said Credit Card. Accordingly, the OP No. 1-Bank by its letter bearing No. CCONP/SN/ 070320117832 dt. 14.3.2011 followed by another letter bearing No. CCONP/AG/250720116538 dt. 25.7.2011, addressed to the Complainant No. 1, informed the Complainant No. 1 to the effect - "Our records reflect that the card was already closed with effect from 13 September 2010 and the card has no outstanding dues payable as on date".
Thereafter, when the Complainant No. 1 jointly with the Complainant No. 2 applied for loan from State Bank of India, Bikash Bhawan, GOC Branch, for purchasing a flat of 1340 sq. ft. worth Rs. 27.86 lacs from M/s. Loknath Developer as per Sale Agreement dt. 31.12.2010, the concerned Bank by its letter dt. 28.2.2011, pending sanction of the loan, requisitioned some documents as the CIBIL reported 'overdue balance of Rs. 2742/-' against the Complainant No. 1. Thus, the processing of loan in question being not made due to the OP No. 1-Bank's reporting to the CIBIL about the 'overdue status' in respect of the Credit Card of the Complainant No. 1, despite the Credit Card Account in question having been closed on 13.9.2010 with no dues outstanding as intimated by the OP No. 1-Bank by its letter dt. 14.3.2011 and 25.7.2011 as mentioned hereinbefore, the Complainant No. 1 had to pay on 17.10.2011 six months' interest of Rs. 2,80,000/- to the Developer being M/s. Loknath Developer, as evident from the Money Receipt bearing No. 261 dt. 17.10.2011 of the said Developer, for the default in payment of 90% amount of the consideration of the flat within the date scheduled in the Agreement for Sale concerned. For such financial loss and also for injury to the social status for causing enlistment by the OP No. 1-Bank the name of the Complainant No. 1 as a defaulter in the list of CIBIL despite there being no outstanding dues against the said Credit Card as admitted by the OP No. 1-Bank in its letters mentioned earlier, the Complainant No. 1 issued a Lawyer's letter dt. 13.12.2011 to the OP No. 1-Bank demanding compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/-, in response to which the OP No. 1-Bank by its letter dt. 9.2.2013 informed the Complainant No. 1 that the Credit Card of the Complainant No. 1 was 'cancelled' but the account concerned was not 'closed' referring to the difference between 'cancellation and closure' of the Card. Thus, the Complainant No. 1 having got no redress of his problem, moved the present Complaint jointly with the Complainant No. 2.
The Ld. Advocate for the Complainants submits that it is clear from the letter bearing No. CCONP/SN/070320117832 dt. 14.3.2011 issued by the OP No. 1-Bank addressing the Complainant No. 1 that the Card was 'closed' with effect from 13.9.2010 and the Card had no outstanding dues payable as on date and that despite there being no outstanding dues as admitted by the OP No. 1-Bank in the said letter, the act by the OP No. 1-Bank for causing the name of the Complainant enlisted in the Defaulters' List of CIBIL is a gross deficiency and utter negligence in service on the part of the OP No.1-Bank.
The Ld. Advocate further submits that the purported difference of 'cancellation and closure' of the Credit Card, as the OP No. 1 has resorted to for shaking off its liability for deficiency in service, also does not stand to reason in view of the admitted position of the OP No. 1-Bank in its letter dt. 14.3.2011 followed by another letter dt. 25.7.2011 to the effect - "there is no outstanding due payable towards the card account as on date", as evident from Annexure-D as available on records.
The Ld. Advocate adds that after such admission of the OP No. 1-Bank that there is no outstanding dues in respect of the Credit Card in question, no outstanding dues can be tagged with the Credit Card in question by any reason whatsoever.
The ld. Advocate also submits that as per dictionary meaning, there is no difference between the words 'closure' and 'cancellation' as both the words mean 'bringing to an end' or 'termination' and hence, the plea of difference between the words 'closure' and 'cancellation', as resorted to by the OP No. 1-Bank, is nothing but a design to evade the liability for deficiency in service on the part of the OP No. 1-Bank.
The Ld. Advocate finally submits that in view of the aforesaid evidence on records and submission, the instant Complaint should be allowed with compensation, of Rs. 25,00,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from January, 2012 till the date of actual payment, for financial loss, harassment and injury to social status of the Complainant No. 1.
None appears on behalf of the OPs on the date of final hearing despite their appearance on 16.9.2013, 28.2.2014, etc. as evident from the orders of the concerned dates of this Commission.
However, in the Written Version, as filed by the OP No. 1-Bank, it has been averred "in the instant case even though the Credit Card Account of the Complainant No. 1 was cancelled in September, 2010, but still there was an outstanding of Rs. 1226.70 payable by the Complainant, so the card account was not closed" and that 'incremental charges' were added to the said outstanding dues of the Credit Card. It has also been stated in the said Written Version that cancellation and closure of card account are two different measures. In the said Written Version the OP-Bank has denied the enlistment of the name of the Complainant No. 1 in the Defaulters' List of CIBIL adding that the name of the Complainant No. 1 was enlisted in the CIBIL due to non-payment of outstanding dues as stated earlier.
In the said Written Version it has been further stated by the OP No. 1-Bank that the issue of Agreement for Sale, as referred to by the Respondent No. 1, was not within the knowledge of the OP No. 1-Bank.
In the said Written Version the OP No. 1 has denied the alleged deficiency in service on its part.
We have heard the Ld. Advocate for the Complainants and considered the contention of the OP No. 1-Bank in the Written Version as filed and perused the materials on records.
The letter, bearing No. CCONP/AG/25072116538 dt. 25.7.2011 by the OP No. 1-Bank to the Complainant No. 1 preceded by its another letter bearing No. CCONP/SN/070320117832 dt. 14.3.2011, reveals "Our records reflect that your above mentioned credit card has been closed, as per your request, with effect from 13 September 2010 and there is no outstanding due payable towards the card account as on date", declaring thereby explicitly that there was no outstanding dues whatsoever in respect of the card account of the Complainant No. 1 in question.
On the other side, the letter No. RACPC/ak/10-11/129 dt. 28.2.2011 issued by State Bank of India, Bikash Bhavan GOC Branch, being the bank where the loan for purchase of the flat by the Complainant No. 1 was applied for, reveals "As per CIBIL report applicant has an overdue credit card account having overdue balance of Rs. 2742/- and undisclosed loan account", for which was invited fresh proposal for loan after rectification of the said irregularities with supporting documents.
The aforesaid facts, evidence on records and the discussion lead us to conclude that there was gross deficiency and utter negligence in service on the part of the OP No. 1-Bank for causing the name of the Complainant No. 1 enlisted in the Defaulters' List of CIBIL despite there being no outstanding dues in respect of the Credit Card Account in question as expressly admitted by the OP No. 1-Bank in its two letters referred to hereinbefore, and also for causing financial loss involved in the transaction of purchase of flat in question apart from grave injury to the social status of the Complainant No. 1 by causing enlistment of the name of the Complainant No. 1 in the Defaulters' List of CIBIL.
In the result, the Complaint is allowed against the OP No. 1-Bank, and the OP No. 1-Bank is directed to pay as compensation to the Complainants Rs. 2,80,000/- on account of financial loss involved in payment of interest by the Complainants to the Developer for non-payment of the consideration as per payment schedule of the Agreement for Sale due to non-sanction of the loan on the ground of enlistment of the name of the Complainant No. 1 in the Defaulters' List of CIBIL and also Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) for harassment and mental agony, and further Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh and fifty thousand only) for irreparable injury to the social status of the Complainant No. 1 by enlisting his name in the Defaulters' List of CIBIL by the OP No. 1-Bank.
The OP No. 1-Bank is also directed to pay to the Complainants Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) as litigation cost.
All the above directions have to be complied with within 45 days from the date of this order, failing which simple interest @ 9% per annum shall accrue on the entire amount for the entire period of default. [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KALIDAS MUKHERJEE] PRESIDENT [HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY] MEMBER