Smt. Daya Devi wife of Sh. Puram Nand resident of village Paushi Post Office Bharain, Tehsil and District Kullu, HP

..Complainant.
V/s

Sheen Agro and Plantation Ltd ( An Agro Plantation Project Investment Registered under company Act,1956) through its Managing Director Registered HO, 243 Canal Road, Jammu ,J & K.(India ).

..Opposite party

.For the complainant Sh. Dharminder Sharma Advocate
Opposite parties Exparte


Complaint U/S 12 of the Consumer
Protection Act,1986
ORDER
This order shall dispose of a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) instituted by the complainant against the opposite party. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party is doing business of private financing. The opposite party had opened the branch office at Kullu. . The complainant invested a sum of Rs.20,000/- on 5-6-2000 for 90 months with the opposite party and she was issued a certificate No.4016 on 5-6-2000. The fixed deposit was to mature on 5-12-2007 with maturity value at Rs.60,000/-. On 5-12-2007 the complainant approached the Branch Manager, Kullu of the opposite party but he refused to pay the amount .With these allegations the complainant has sought a direction to the opposite party to pay Rs.60,000/- with interest at the rate of 10% from the date of maturity till realization and also to pay Rs.500/- as costs . A sum of Rs.5000/- has also been claimed on account of mental torture.


2 The opposite party, despite notice did not ,contest the complaint and was proceeded agaisnt exparte.


3. We have heard, ld. Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record. The complainant had adduced in evidence photocopy of the fixed deposit receipt which reflects that a sum of Rs.20,000/- had been invested by her with the opposite party on 5-6-2000 to be matured in the sum of Rs..60,000/- on 5-12-2007. The complainant has also supported the contents of her complaint by means of her own affidavit. The opposite party had not contested the complaint and was proceeded agaisnt exparte which shows that it had nothing to say in the matter except to admit the case of the complainant. Hence there is no reason to reject the complaint supported by affidavit of the complainant and documentary evidence. Therefore , the complainant is held entitled to Rs..60,000/- with interest from the opposite party.


4 In view of above discussion the complaint U/S 12 of the Act of the complainant is allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of RS.60,000/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% PA from the date of maturity i.e.5-12-2007 till payment and also to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation for harassment and a sum of Rs.500/ as costs of litigation.