Shri Swapan Kumar Mahanty, President.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
The complaint, in brief, as follows :-
The O.P. Alchemist Township India Ltd. launched a deposit scheme to the public at large for investment and the complainant invested Rs.95,000/- dividing in two parts i.e. Rs.75,000/- and Rs.20,000/- on 13/07/2013 and 15/07/2013 respectively to the O.P. for a period of 54 months and 57 months respectively against Certificate Nos.TCC0518674 and TCC00084849. The maturity date of those certificates were on 31/03/2018 and 01/05/2018 respectively and the total maturity value of those certificate is Rs.1,90,000/-. In spite of maturity, the O.P. did not refund the invested amount. On the contrary, the O.P. assured to transfer the invested amount to the Bank Account of the complainant but no payment has been credited to her Bank Account. It is alleged that the O.P. has adopted unfair trade practice towards discharging their duties and liabilities. The complainant has prayed for refund of the matured amount including other reliefs in terms of the petition of complaint.
In spite of service of notice O.P. did not turn up to contest the case. As such, the case has proceeded ex-parte against the O.P.
Point for Decision
- Has the O.P. deficient in rendering service to the complainant ?
- Has the O.P. indulged in unfair trade practice ?
- Is the complainant entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?
Decision with Reasons
Points No.-1 to 3.
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity in discussion.
To establish her case complainant has produced photocopies of certificates bearing Nos.TCC0518674 and TCC00084849 of Alchemist Township India Ltd. On perusal of those certificates we find that complainant invested Rs.95,000/- with the O.P. company and the maturity value of those certificates was Rs.1,90,000/-. The maturity date of those certificates were 31/03/2018 and 01/05/2018. In spite of maturity, the O.P. did not refund the matured amount.
We do not find any reason why the O.P. collected the amount from the depositors by issuing certificates and hold the amount as per their own discretion. Therefore, we hold that the O.P. demonstrated a gesture of deficiency in service and indulged in unfair trade practice. O.P. has also caused harassment, mental pain and agony to the complainant.
Complainant corroborates her case by adducing evidence on affidavit as well as by producing documents. The evidence of complainant remains unchallenged and uncontroverted. In absence of any contrary and controverting materials on record and having regard to the documents on record, we are of the opinion that the complainant has been able to prove his case. As such, the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for. Thus, all the points under determination answered in the affirmative.
In result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered
That the complaint case be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the O.P. in part with litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only.
O.P. is directed to pay the matured amount of Rs.1,90,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Thousand) only to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order with litigation cost.
O.P. is further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only tot eh complainant for causing harassment, mental pain and agony within the stipulated period.
O.P. is also directed to deposit Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only to this Forum as punitive damage for practicing unfair trade within the specified period.
Liberty be given to the complainant to put the order into execution,if the OP transgress to comply the order.
