West Bengal

Nadia

CC/284/2019

MOJAMMEL MOLLA - Complainant(s)

Versus

FRANCHISE GUARDIAN, ( SAMRAT GHOSH) - Opp.Party(s)

MAKBUL RAHAMAN

30 Nov 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NADIA
170,DON BOSCO ROAD, AUSTIN MEMORIAL BUILDING.
NADIA, KRISHNAGAR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/284/2019
( Date of Filing : 02 Sep 2019 )
 
1. MOJAMMEL MOLLA
S/O- NAFAR MOLLA VILL.-CHICHURIA UTTAR PARA P.O.- CHICHURIA P.S.- NAKASHIPARA PIN- 741126
Nadia
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. FRANCHISE GUARDIAN, ( SAMRAT GHOSH)
SANTIPUR BRANCH SAHARA Q SHOP. SAHARA INDIA PARIVAR, SANTIPUR BRANCH, P.O.- SANTIPUR P.S.- SANTIPUR PIN- 741404
Nadia
West Bengal
2. REGIONAL MANAGER SAHARA Q SHOP
SAHARA INDIA PARIVAR, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR BADAMTALA, MADHYAM GRAM KOLKATA-700 130
NORTH 24 PARGANAS
West Bengal
3. CHIEF MANAGER SAHARA Q SHOP
SAHARA INDIA PARIVAR, JAWAHAR LAL NEHERU ROAD, ELGIN KOLKATA-700 071
Kolkata
West Bengal
4. M.D. (SUBRATA ROY) SAHARA Q SHOP
SAHARA INDIA PARIVAR SAHARA INDIA BHABAN, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, ALIGANG, LUCKNOW-226 024
Lucknow
U P
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. MALLIKA SAMADDER MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY MEMBER
 
PRESENT:MAKBUL RAHAMAN, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 30 Nov 2022
Final Order / Judgement

Ld. Advocate(s)

                        For Complainant: Mokbul Rahaman

                        For OP/OPs : None

 

Date of filing of the case                :02.09.2019

Date of Disposal  of the case         : 30.11.2022

 

Final Order / Judgment dtd.30.11.2022

 

 

This is a case under section 12 of the Consumer Protection act 1986 filed by the aforesaid complainant against the aforesaid opposite parties praying for refund of Rs. 18,011/-, interest for the further period, compensation and litigation cost.

 

Complainant stated in the complaint that he deposited total sum of Rs.7,650/-  before the office of OP no.1 under Sahara Q  Shop Unique Product scheme and one  document was  prepared by OP no.1 to that effect and handed over the same to him.

 But after maturity date OP no.1 expressed that he is unable to give the maturity value.

 

Thereafter he served a notice to the OP no.1 through his Ld. Adv. and copy of the same also been sent to OP no. 2 - 4 but he did not get any fruitful result. Hence he lodged this complaint before this Commission praying for appropriate relief and redressal.

 

After admission  of the aforesaid  complaint,  notices were  issued upon the OPs but neither the OPs nor their representative /representatives came  forward before this  Commission to  contest  this  complaint  case, hence  the instant case fixed for ex-parte hearing.

 

During Ex-parte hearing of this case, complainant produced some original document including the deposit certificate relating to aforesaid deposit dtd. 17.09.2012 vide no. 562006792897.                                                                                      

Ld. Adv. for the complainant submitted Affidavit – in – Chief which is unchallenged testimony and brief notes of argument. He also made verbal submission.

 

We have carefully gone through the aforesaid documents. No doubt regarding genuineness of this document appeared before us and we think that these documents may be considered.

 

 

DECISION WITH REASONS

 

It is the case of the complainant that on 17.09.2012 he deposited Rs. 7,650/- before the office of OP no.1 in the under Sahara Q Shop Unique Product” Scheme and after lapse of maturity date i.e 17.09.2018 he wanted the maturity value and he went before the office of OP no. 1 for the said purpose but OP no. 1 expressed his inability to refund the matured value.

 

During hearing Ld. Advocate for the complainant argued that in such a situation he issued a notice dtd. 13.08.2019 under Speed Post to the  OP no. 1  requesting  him to repay the maturity value  of the said deposit  and copy of the same also been sent to OP no. 2 to 4 but those notices  did not  return before him within a reasonable  period  which compelled him to believe that those notices  have been properly served upon aforesaid OPs.

 

 

We also find from the documents on record that OP no.1 is the representative of OP no. 2-4. We also find that complainant is the consumer under the OPs within the purview of C.P.Act 1986, and subject matter of the complaint is under the jurisdiction of this commission. We also find that cause of action of this case has arisen on 13.08.2019  and complainant has filed this case on 02.09.2019 i.e. within the period of limitation.

 

Considering the materials on record and in view of the aforesaid discussion we do not find any reason to disbelieve the aforesaid contention of the complainant. So we are of the opinion that complainant deposited the aforesaid sum before the OPs but they avoided to return the maturity value to the complainant. So it is held that OPs have jointly or severally and willfully neglected to return the maturity value of aforesaid fixed deposit amount to the complainant

So we are  of the further view that complainant  has able to establish his grievance against the OPs before this Commission which amount to deficiency  of services on the part of OPs under the purview of C.P.Act 1986.

 

 

Accordingly we are of the opinion that complainant is entitled to relief as per his prayer.

In the result petition of the complainant succeeds.

 

 

Hence, it is

ORDERED,

 

That the present case be and the  same is allowed ex-parte against the OPs With cost.

That  the  OPs no 1-4 jointly or severally are hereby directed to refund the maturity value of the aforesaid fixed deposit amounting to  Rs.18,011-/   (Eighteen  thousand Eleven only) along with further  interests @ 9 % per annum from the date of maturity of the said fixed deposits i.e from 17.09.2018  to till the actual  date of repayment to the complainant.

       OP no. 1-4 are further directed to pay compensation amounting

Rs.3, 000/-  to the complainant for  his  harassment, mental pain and agony.

OP no. 1-4 are further directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- as litigation cost to the Complainant.

OPno.1-4 are further directed to pay aforesaid awarded amount within 30 days from the date of order to the complainant,  failing which complainant shall have liberty to put this order into execution.

          Let a plain copy to this final order be supplied to the complainant free of cost.

 

Dictated & corrected by me

 

   ……………………                                              ……………………                                              

           MEMBER                                                                MEMBER                                   

 (NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY)                                                                 (NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY)                                   

                                                                                                                                                              

I concur,

 

                                                                       

            MEMBER                                                                                 PRESIDENT                                                              (SMT MALLIKA SAMADDAR)                                                                          (Shri   dAMAN pROSAD BISWAS)

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. DAMAN PROSAD BISWAS]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. MALLIKA SAMADDER]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.