Deduction Of Excess Toll Tax, Panchkula Commission Holds Chandi Mandir Toll Plaza And ICICI Bank Liable, Directs Refund And Rs. 1 Lakh Compensation
Recently, the Panchkula District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising Satpal (President), Sushma Garg (Member) and Barhm Parkash Yadav (Member) held Himalayan Express Way Limited and ICICI Bank liable for their unfair trade practices and ordered them to pay a total of ₹1 lakh in punitive damages to the complainant. The complaint filed before the District...
Recently, the Panchkula District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising Satpal (President), Sushma Garg (Member) and Barhm Parkash Yadav (Member) held Himalayan Express Way Limited and ICICI Bank liable for their unfair trade practices and ordered them to pay a total of ₹1 lakh in punitive damages to the complainant. The complaint filed before the District Commission revolved around the deduction of an incorrect toll while the complainant was travelling to Panchkula for work.
Brief facts of the case:
Anita Kumari (“Complainant”), was a daily commuter residing in Pinjore and commuting to Panchkula for work at the Treasury office before her retirement in October 2019. Her daily commute necessitated crossing the Chandi mandir Toll Plaza, NHAI, Panchkula. Due to her proximity to the toll plaza, she was eligible for a concessional monthly pass, which cost ₹150.
On October 31, 2019, an amount of ₹930 was erroneously deducted from her FASTag account attached to ICICI Bank, instead of the correct monthly pass fee of ₹150. The complainant promptly reached out to both the Chandi mandir Toll Plaza officials and ICICI Bank, seeking a refund of the excess amount. When no resolution was provided, Complainant filed a consumer complaint, alleging financial loss and mental distress due to the actions of the Chandi Mandir Toll Plaza (operated by Himalayan Express Way Limited) and ICICI Bank in the Panchkula District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
The Complainant asserted that the Chandi mandir Toll Plaza and ICICI Bank had engaged in unfair trade practices by not refunding the excess amount deducted from her FASTag account. She argued that the excess deduction of ₹930, as opposed to the prescribed ₹150 for the monthly pass, was in clear violation of relevant notifications. The Complainant claimed to have lodged complaints with ICICI Bank, seeking a resolution, but received no satisfactory response, leading to financial loss and mental distress.
Chandi Mandir Toll Plaza acknowledged the issuance of an RFID-enabled FASTag to the complainant for her vehicle and admitted that she was entitled to a local area concession, paying ₹150 per month. They contended that the mistake occurred due to a technical glitch in the ICICI Bank portal, resulting in excess charges. This glitch affected 44 other customers as well. Chandi Mandir Toll Plaza claimed to have promptly contacted all affected customers, including the complainant and offered to adjust the extra debited amount against subsequent months. They argued that ₹600 had already been adjusted against the complainant's future usage of the toll plaza, leaving only ₹180 outstanding.
ICICI Bank raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the complainant had not approached the Consumer Protection Commission with clean hands and had suppressed material facts in the complaint. They contended that the complainant had applied for a FASTag facility online, and the technical glitch was due to Chandi Mandir Toll Plaza incorrectly categorizing the monthly pass as a general pass.
Observations by the Commission:
The District Commission recognized that the complainant, as a resident living within a 10 km radius of the Chandi mandir Toll Plaza, was rightfully entitled to a concessional monthly pass, as stipulated by relevant notifications. This concessional pass had a fixed fee of ₹150, according to the regulations. It was evident to the District Commission that deducting ₹930 from Anita Kumari's FASTag account, instead of the prescribed ₹150 for the monthly pass, was a clear violation of the regulations. The regulations explicitly limited the fee for local area traffic to ₹150, making the act of Chandi mandir Toll Plaza in charging an excess amount both invalid and illegal.
In light of these clear violations of regulations and the failure to address the complainant's grievances, the Commission concluded that both Chandi Mandir Toll Plaza and ICICI Bank had engaged in unfair trade practices. Consequently, the District Commission ordered the Chandi Mandir Toll Plaza ordered to reimburse Anita Kumari a sum of ₹330. Both the Chandi mandir Toll Plaza and ICICI Bank were directed by the District Commission to pay punitive damages totalling ₹1,00,000 (₹1 Lakh) due to their involvement in unfair trade practices.
Case: Anita Kumari vs. M/S Himalayan Express Way Ltd.
Case No.: CC/684/2019
Advocate for the Complainant: Sandeep Aggarwal
Advocate for the Respondent: N.K.Vohra and Ammish Goel