A.K.ANNAMALAI, J. - (1.) The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant.
(2.) The complainant availed the credit card facility from the opposite parties and the credit limit for the same was given up to Rs.60,000/-. Complainant and his wife visited Singapore in the last week of April 2001 and as they were interested to purchase gold jewels for the value of Rs.40,000/- and the complainant requested the opposite parties to enhance the credit limit to Rs.80,000/- and sent a Fax message as instructed by the opposite parties on 30.4.2001. But there was no response till 4.5.2001 and when contacted the opposite parties given evasive reply and stated that the fax message did not bear the signature of the complainant and the complainant gave a detailed fax message with signature on 5.5.01 and he was assured for the enhancement of the facility. On 6.5.2001 when he approached the jewellery shop and presented the credit card he was informed that he could purchase the jewellery only for the value of Rs.60,000/- and not for Rs.80,000/-. When contacted the opposite parties through phone for extension of credit card facility, they bluntly refused. Hence the complainant suffered mental agony and estimated the same for Rs.4,00,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/- for deficiency and thereupon he issued a legal notice on 28.5.01 claiming for Rs.5,00,000/- from the opposite parties and thereafter he has landed with this complaint claiming Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation with costs.
(3.) The opposite parties denied the allegations of the complainant in their written version and contended that when the complainant requested the bank to enhance the sanctioned credit limit which was informed that there was no possibility of enhancing the sanctioned credit limit within a period of 6 months of the issuance of credit card and the earlier limit was based upon his status and repayment capacity as per terms and conditions and the card holder is not permitted to use the whole sanctioned value for in the case of cash withdrawal and purchase of gold and other ornaments. Hence there was no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.;