CHANDIGARH: Failing to prove as to how and why an outstanding amount was raised against the complainant, proved dear to a bank. Holding that bank was deficient in services, the UT Consumer Forum directed the State Bank of India to pay Rs 30,000 as compensation to Surinder Singh Bal. The forum added bank will withdraw the credit card bills and also pay Rs 5,000 as litigation cost within 30 days.

In his complaint, 50-year-old Mohali resident had alleged that the bank provided him a credit card in September 2000 and he regularly paid the outstanding dues. However, in April 2002, he requested the bank to close his account and also return the credit card.

But, allegedly, in August 2002, a bank representative approached him and informed him that there is an outstanding amount against him due to usage of the credit card. Ultimately, the matter was settled on the payment of Rs 10,000 and bank issued him a receipt as full and final settlement of the credit card account.

The twist in the tale came when surprisingly after two years, Bal received a letter in April 2004 demanding Rs 9,241 against the credit card account. He immediately wrote to bank that the question of any outstanding payment against him did not arise as he had returned the credit card. However, allegedly, bank did not stop making demand of payment for the use of credit card.

The complaint added that bank raised bills for use of the credit card despite the fact that the same was returned to it in the year 2002. Claiming deficiency in services, Bal instituted a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act.

The SBI, in its reply, said there was amount outstanding against Bal and demand was rightly made. It added that after full payment, a no-dues certificate is required to be given on bank’s letterhead.