Circumstances which diverts the complainant before the commission is that, she namely Sonali Gupta invested Rs.50,000/- to the OP Company on 05/04/2011 and OP company issued the letter of allotment. As per letter of allotment the complainant would be supposed to get Rs.1,00,000/- from the company. Her husband was the nominee as per letter as incretion by the company. But after expiry of the maturity period that is 04/04/2016 when the complainant submitted the letter the allotment along with other documents of investment for realization of maturity value of her investment, these OP Company remained silent and did not pay any amounts. Needles to mention OP Company issued a chaque to cover their deficiency but the chaque was fruit-less one for the complainant science dishonored. Eventually these OP Company were in lack of their service for which this complainant suffered pecuniary loss and mental agony. Accordingly she prays Rs.1,00,000/- as maturity value of her investment and also compensation for harassment and mental agony at the tune of Rs.50,000/-.

       In order substantiate her claim she produced the document before this commission such as:-

        1. letter of allotment.

2. A chaque of Rs.2,50,000/-.

3. Non-clearance certificate from Alahabad bank.

OP Company did not appear to contest the case.

 OP-4 only appeared and contested the case before the commission. Op- 4 Nomita Lasker submitted a W.V. stating that she as no relation with the company, complainant herself invested money she has no knowledge about it. So the case certainly be dismissed against her.

::DECISION WITH REASON::

Point to be decided:- whether complainant is entitle to get any relief?

       Complainant examined herself as witness in writing where she stated, that she invested Rs.50,000/- on 05/04/2011 where maturity value was Rs.1,00,000/- on 04/04/2016. But after submission of all documents on the dated fixed, these OP Company did not returned any single farthing to her. She further submitted in writing that OP-4 Nomita Laskar acted as agent of the company and took active role behind her investment. Nomita Laskar received Rs.50,000/- from her as for investment as agent.

But we the commission find that in cross examination of this OP-4, this complainant clearly admitted that her entire claim is against other Ops that is OP-1,2,3,5,&6 (company) not against OP-4 who was only a agent of post office and she did not take any money from her. This complainant further admitted at her cross examination that OP-4 has no relation with other OP (company). So this commission failed to give any relief to the complainant against her OP No.4

       Behind other Ops this commission carefully perused the documents as filed by the complainant where it is found a chaque was handed over to the complainant at the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- in Allahabad bank chaque No.5123392.  From the clearance certificate as filed by the complainant it is noticed that as fund was insufficient chaque was cleared for the complainant.

       So scrutiny of entire evidence both oral and documentary it is found by this commission that a chaque was handed over to the complainant issued by the Director of Sarada Company on 01/07/2016 as maturity amount (though that was not cleared for the complainant due to insufficiency of fund). Naturally this commission is in dark whether that chaque was cleared or not for the complainant at present or whether this complainant realized that chaque amount on taking any proper recourse to law or not. Accordingly when apparently it is manifested that on behalf of the company a chaque amount was handed over to the complainant, this commission has no option but to order the complainant to take initiation of encashing that chaque by adopting proper law to the proper court under law. This commission has no power to give any further direction to handover the maturity value to the complainant on considering any deficiency of service of the company or they adopted any unfair practice on their part. But this complainant is quite entitled to get compensation at the tune of Rs.50,000/- for her unnecessary harassment behind the chaque as insufficiency of fund of the chaque amount. In respect of other OP that is OP- 4, since the complainant admitted at her cross examination that she has no claim against OP-4 the case would be dismissed against her.

Hence ordered,

 that the complaint is allowed in ex-party against OP- 1,2,3,5&6, they are jointly or severely liable to pay Rs.50,000/- in cash to the complainant for her harassment/mental agony.

 Complainant is entitled to take proper recourse to law for bouncing of the chaque amount dated 04/04/2016 if not incashed.

       Further more if compensation for harassment as ordered by this commission is not handed over by the OP- 1,2,3,5&6, jointly of severely to the complainant within three month form the dated of this order, the complainant is at liberty to execute the final order with regard to this compensation under section 71/72 of Consumer Protection act.

Let a copy of order be supplied to the parties free of cost.