1. Case of the complainant is that once he become customer of the respondent bank in June 2005 and utilized the facility of credit card he cleared all the debt till 17-11-06 and by way of closing the transaction returned the credit cards but the respondent bank has not issued N.O.C in this regard to the complainant inspite of repeated requests, rather issued notice claiming further amount which was totally unjustified. It was claimed by the complainant he spent 50000/- in connection with the correspondence etc with respondent bank to get clearance certificate which amount may be awarded to him.
2. Respondent 1&5 in this case were proceeded exparte vide order 15-11-09. Respondent No.2 to 4 contested the complaint stating that respondent bank have never issued any notice to complainant etc demanding any sort of amount. No amount is pending against the complainant, the account is totally clear and transaction using the credit card has been closed finally.
3. In order to establish his case complainant produced Muhammad Usman Mirza as PW1, Muhammad Shahbaz as PW2 and himself appeared as PW3. He also produced the following documents:-
4. On the other hand on behalf of respondent bank Saqib Raza Bukhari appeared as RW1 and Muhammad Sadiq Ashraf appeared as RW2. Besides, the following documentary evidence were produced:-
5. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
6. It is important to mention that during pendency of the case before this Court the requisite N.O.C was supplied by respondent bank to the complainant. The admitted fact of the complaint is that the complainant remained customer of bank who used the credit card facility and closed the transaction finally on 17-11-06 etc. The matter in dispute in this case is non issuance of N.O.C to the customer by the respondent bank. Admittedly after closing the transaction on 17-11-06 the requite N.O.C was to be issued on 24-03-09 and that too with the intervention of the Court. During the course of evidence respondent RW1 stated that complainant never demanded the N.O.C in question from the respondent bank. As per record legal notice was dispatched to respondent bank in the month of July 2008 by the complainant even than the N.O.C was handed over to the complainant in the Court in March 2009. From the statement of RW1 it transpires that non issuance of the N.O.C to the complainant was the result of wrangling between different departments of the bank. Contention of the respondent bank is that complainant deposited the outstanding amount in the main branch and he had to approach the consumer branch for collection of N.O.C which was to be issued from the head office at Karachi. According to the statement of RW2 the respondent bank was bound to made clearance of the amount within 45 days of the settled amount by the complainant but in this case the respondent bank failed to discharge its liability and instead of issuing the requisite N.O.C continued to issue demand notices for further deposit of money. It is a matter of a grant concern that Financial Institutions in our country trap the consumer in their golden net offering lucrative temptation but always fail to discharge their moral and legal duty towards such prey with regard to providing of professional services and this case is the one of the example. The respondent bank badly failed to discharge its obligations qua the consumer services, therefore, respondent bank is directed to pay Rs. 1120/- for proclamation in news paper, Rs. 340/- for postal expenses, Rs. 2200/- counsel fee, Rs. 500/- legal expanses along with Rs. 5000/- as compensation to the complainant. Respondent bank is directed to pay all above said dues to the complainant within one month of passing of this judgment. File be consigned to the record room after its due completion.