INDUSIND BANK AND ORS Vs. SWATI DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by Learned District Forum, Kolkata, Unit -II in case no.CC 108 of 2012 allowing the complaint ex parte and directing the OPs to refund Rs.49,325/ - to the complainant within 45 days from the date of communication of the order failing which the interest @ 9% per annum shall accrue from the date of filing till actual payment. The Learned District Forum further directed the OPs to pay Rs.25,000/ - as compensation and Rs.5,000/ - as litigation cost.

(2.) THE case of the complainant/respondent, in short, is that she has a Savings Bank Account with the OP. Subsequently, the OPs sent a bill to the complainant for the period from 01/10/11 to 30/11/11. From the said statement the complainant noticed that the OP No.2 had shown withdrawal of Rs.49,324.95/ - from the Savings Bank Account of the complainant for credit card payment. The complainant on getting such statement was taken aback as she never withdrew any amount from her Savings Bank Account nor used any credit card. It has been stated in the complaint that she never obtained any credit card from any bank and, as such, the question of credit card payment did not arise at all. The complainant wrote a letter dated 15/11/11 to OP No.2 and subsequently a reminder dated 15/12/11 asking the OP No.2 under what authority the said amount was deducted from her Savings Bank Account. No reply was sent by the bank to the complainant. Under the circumstances, the complaint was filed by the complainant.

(3.) THE Learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted that the complainant applied for credit card to Deutsche Bank which subsequently came to be merged with IndusInd Bank. It is submitted that the last payment in respect of the credit card was made by the complainant on 25/08/08 to the tune of Rs.5,000/ - and thereafter no payment was made. It is submitted that the complainant had one Savings Bank Account and by exercising the right of lien and set off the bank debited the amount towards outstanding from the Savings Bank Account of the complainant for payment to the credit card account. It is contended that both Swati Chakraborty and Swati Das are one and same person. It is submitted that before marriage the surname of the complainant was Das and after marriage it became Chakraborty. It is contended that the date of birth and the Pan Card number in the application form for credit card and those in the application form for opening Savings Bank Account were the same. It is submitted that after marriage the address of the complainant was changed. The Learned Counsel for the appellants has referred to the decisions reported in [Canara Bank Vs. Roop Dutt, 2010 1 ShimLC 96]; [Syndicate Bank Vs. Vijay Kumar and Ors., 1992 AIR(SC) 1066] and the decision of this Commission in case no.FA 350 of 2011 [Axis Bank Ltd. Vs. Jayanta Mitra].