Abhay Raghubir Vs. the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1112400
CourtDelhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided OnOct-03-2005
Case NumberAppeal No. 1878 of 2003
JudgeJ.D. KAPOOR, PRESIDENT & MR. MAHESH CHANDRA, MEMBER
AppellantAbhay Raghubir
RespondentThe Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited
Excerpt:
consumer protection act, 1986 - section 2(1)(g) - comparative citations: 2006 (1) cpr 404, 2006 (1) cpj 158j.d. kapoor, president: 1. complaint of the appellant seeking compensation of rs. 1,00,000 on account of mental pain and agony caused to him by the respondent bank by not reversing the entries of 29.95 and 39.95 dollars in his credit account was dismissed vide impugned order 10.10.2003, passed by the district forum for the reasons that the appellant failed to show as to what kind of mental agony he suffered because of this lapse on the part of the respondent while on the other hand the appellant had stopped making payment of minimum dues for which the respondent bank sent their officials to receive the same. 2. feeling aggrieved by this order the appellant has directed this appeal. 3. there is no dispute that the respondent bank was negligent in not reversing the usd 29.95 and 39.95 respectively and instead of rectifying their mistake they continued raising the bill on the basis of minimum dues and went to the extent of sending their personnel to collect the dues forcibly. this was not the way to make recoveries from the appellant and such an act on the part of the respondent bank did cause the mental pain and agony to the appellant who had grievance against the respondent bank, which was not redressed. appellant was justified in not making the payment of minimum dues because of the failure of the respondent in not reversing the entries in his credit card account. 4. on the other hand the respondent has submitted that the aforesaid entries were reverted on 15.10.2002 after a telephonic complaint was received from the appellant within stipulated period of 30 days and the disputed amount was credited in the account of the appellant. according to the appellant, the appellant not only made telephonic complaint in this regard but also sent a letter dated 1.10.2002 and inaction on the part of the respondent in not reversing the entries and not giving reply to the said letter and rather raising bill on the minimum dues was unwarranted and deficiency in service. 5. taking overall view of the matter and the mental pain and agony suffered by the appellant due to deficiency in service on the part of the respondent bank, we deem that compensation of rs. 5,000 would meet the ends of justice. the aforesaid amount shall be paid within one month of this order. 6. appeal is disposed of in above terms. bank guarantee/fdr, if any, furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith. 7. 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. appeal disposed of.
Judgment:

J.D. Kapoor, President:

1. Complaint of the appellant seeking compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 on account of mental pain and agony caused to him by the respondent Bank by not reversing the entries of 29.95 and 39.95 dollars in his credit account was dismissed vide impugned order 10.10.2003, passed by the District Forum for the reasons that the appellant failed to show as to what kind of mental agony he suffered because of this lapse on the part of the respondent while on the other hand the appellant had stopped making payment of minimum dues for which the respondent bank sent their officials to receive the same.

2. Feeling aggrieved by this order the appellant has directed this appeal.

3. There is no dispute that the respondent Bank was negligent in not reversing the USD 29.95 and 39.95 respectively and instead of rectifying their mistake they continued raising the bill on the basis of minimum dues and went to the extent of sending their personnel to collect the dues forcibly. This was not the way to make recoveries from the appellant and such an act on the part of the respondent bank did cause the mental pain and agony to the appellant who had grievance against the respondent Bank, which was not redressed. Appellant was justified in not making the payment of minimum dues because of the failure of the respondent in not reversing the entries in his credit card account.

4. On the other hand the respondent has submitted that the aforesaid entries were reverted on 15.10.2002 after a telephonic complaint was received from the appellant within stipulated period of 30 days and the disputed amount was credited in the account of the appellant. According to the appellant, the appellant not only made telephonic complaint in this regard but also sent a letter dated 1.10.2002 and inaction on the part of the respondent in not reversing the entries and not giving reply to the said letter and rather raising bill on the minimum dues was unwarranted and deficiency in service.

5. Taking overall view of the matter and the mental pain and agony suffered by the appellant due to deficiency in service on the part of the respondent Bank, we deem that compensation of Rs. 5,000 would meet the ends of justice. The aforesaid amount shall be paid within one month of this order.

6. Appeal is disposed of in above terms. Bank guarantee/FDR, if any, furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith.

7. 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.

Appeal disposed of.