Ld. Advocate(s)
For Complainant .. Mokbul Rahaman
For OP/OPs .. Ex-parte.
Date of Filing : 25.10.2019
Date of Disposal : 19.05.2022
: FINAL ORDER dtd. 19.05.2022 :
An application has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the C.P. Act 1986 alleging deficiency in service against the OPs for non payment of the maturity amount of one certificate of Rs.16,450/-( Rupees sixteen thousand four hundred fifty only) along with up to date interest as prayed in the petition of the complaint.
The complainant further claimed Rs.20,000/- as compensation due to mental pain, agony and harassment etc and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/-.
The brief fact of the case of the complainant is that the complainant invested a sum of Rs.7,000/-( seven thousand only) to the OP No.1 on 25.05.2012 and the said investment was made under Sahara Q Shop plan H deposit Scheme of the O.Ps for 06 years and the Ops Company duly issued one certificate being No. 562009604093. The date of the maturity of the said certificate was on 25.05.2018 .
It is the contention of the complainant that after the expiry of the maturity date, the complainant demanded for the said maturity amount to the OP No.1 and it is alleged by the complainant that OP no.1 on 07.01.2019 expressed inability to pay maturity amount to the complainant and thereafter, the complainant sent advocate notice to the OP No.1 on16.07.2019. But even after that the OP No.1 did not pay the maturity benefit to the complainant in respect of the said certificate.
Finding no other alternative, the complainant is constrained to file this complaint before this District Forum (now District Commission) for proper redressal.
The complainant along with his complaint petition filed the following documents:-
- Copy of certificate No. 562009604093.
2. Copy of advocate letter dated 16.07.2019
It is seen from the order No: 03, dated 20.02.2020 that notices were served to the OPs. Despite receiving notices the O.Ps did not turn up before the Dist. Forum and therefore the Forum decided to proceed with the case ex-parte against them.
During hearing, the complainant filed written affidavit-in-chief and submitted the original documents as mentioned above by making annexure in order to prove the case.
From the complaint petition, evidence adduced by the complainant, following points have been framed.
1. Is the complainant a consumer?
2. Are the OPs deficient in providing service?
3. Is the complainant entitled to get any relief as per prayed for?
Decision with reasons
All the points have taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
It is seen from the evidence of the complainant and other materials on record that the complainant invested a sum of Rs.7,000/-( Rs.seven thousand only) on 25.05.2012 under “Sahara Q shop plan H deposit Scheme” with the OP No. 1 and the OP No. 1 accepted the said amount and the O.Ps Company issued certificate being No.562009604093. Such deposit was made for 06 years only.
Therefore, in our view the complainant is a consumer under OPs as per definition given U/S 2(1) (d) of the C.P Act 1986 and the O.Ps were the service providers of the complainant as per definition of U/S 2(o) C.P Act 1986.
Now, in order to ascertain, whether the OPs were deficient or not we have to consider the evidence of the complaint once again.
It is evident from the evidence of the complaint that the complainant invested Rs.7,000/- to the OP No. 1 and OPs Company issued certificate as noted above which transpires that gross or total redemption amount of the deposit was Rs.16,450/( sixteen thousand four hundred fifty only) and the maturity date was 25.05.1018. The OP No:1 did not pay back the maturity amount as aforesaid even after making demand and sending advocate letter. The O.P No. 2, 3 and 4 are the Regional Manager, Chief Manager and Managing Director of the same company.
In our view, all the OPs are deficient in service for non disbursing the maturity amount of Rs.16,450/- to the complainant and the Complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for but in part.
In order to ascertain the quantum of compensation and litigation cost we think that an amount of Rs. 3,000/-as compensation and Rs.3,000/- as cost of the proceeding are appropriate and just in order to mitigate the loss suffered by the complainant. Therefore, we award such amount as compensation and litigation cost. The unchallenged testimony of the complainant proves his case. All the points go in favour of the complainant.
It is to be mentioned here that the instant case was filed under provision of CP Act 1986 and the case was proceeded under the said Act.
Hence , it is
O R D E R E D,
That the Consumer Complaint, being No: CC/332/2019 is allowed ex-parte but in part against the Ops with cost.
All the OPs are hereby jointly and severally directed to pay the maturity amount of Rs.16,450/-( Rupees Sixteen Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Only) to the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order.
In default such amount shall carry an interest @ 09% p.a. till realisation.
All the OPs are further jointly and severally directed to pay compensation of Rs. 3,000/- and litigation of Rs. 3,000/- to the complainant within the aforesaid period of 45 days.
In default the Complainant is at liberty to file an execution application for enforcement of the final order before this District Commission as per provisions of law.
Let a free copy of this order be given to the parties concerned as per provision of C.P.R, 2005.
