The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore (Karnataka) bench, consisting of B. Narayanappa (President), Jyothi N (Member), and Sharavathi S.M (Member), recently held Standard Chartered Bank and Shaha Finlease Pvt. Ltd liable for deficiency in services. The commission found that they had demanded money from the complainant to settle a credit card due, despite the complainant already paying Rs. 15,500/- for full and final settlement. As a result, the bench directed the bank and the NBFC to pay Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation, along with Rs. 3,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by the complainant.
Background of the Case
Mr. V.V. Venkatesh Babu, the complainant, entered into a credit card agreement with Standard Chartered Bank. However, he surrendered the card in 2010. Despite not using the card, the bank began harassing the complainant through incessant calls, claiming rental charges for the surrendered card. The complainant requested the bank to close the erroneously issued credit card. The bank proposed closing the associated account upon payment of Rs. 15,500/- as a full and final settlement. The complainant paid this amount on 07.08.2010. In response, the bank confirmed the payment in a letter, assuring the complainant of no outstanding dues and promising to remove his name from CIBIL records.
However, subsequent issues arose when the complainant faced loan rejections and higher interest rates due to a demand from Shaha Finlease Pvt. Ltd. The NBFC sought Rs. 20,491/- from the complainant for a no-due certificate and to update the CIBIL records as settled. Feeling aggrieved, the complainant approached the Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore and filed a consumer complaint against the bank and the NBFC.
Proceedings and Decision
During the proceedings, the bank did not appear before the District Commission. The NBFC argued that the complaint was time-barred, as the complainant approached them in 2018, eight years after the incident, and filed the complaint after five years.
The District Commission noted that the complainant had made a payment of Rs. 15,500/- towards the dues, which was confirmed by the bank. The bank stated that there were no outstanding dues in the credit card account and assured the complainant of updating the appropriate status in CIBIL records. However, discrepancies arose when the bank informed the complainant about an overdue amount of Rs. 5,41,831/-. Additionally, the NBFC demanded Rs. 20,491/- for a No Due Certificate and to update the amount in CIBIL records.
The District Commission observed that despite the bank’s assurances, the NBFC demanded Rs. 20,491/- to issue a “No Due Certificate.” Therefore, it held both the bank and the NBFC liable for deficiency in services.
Consequently, the District Commission directed the bank and the NBFC to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the complainant, with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of the order until the payment is made. Additionally, they were directed to bear the litigation costs amounting to Rs. 3,000/- incurred by the complainant.
