O R D E R

By Smt. Sreeja S. Member:

          Opposite parties issued a ‘Kanaka Vrishty’ Scheme to purchase pure gold. As per the scheme the subscriber has to deposit Rs.1,000/- per month for 15 months and will get gold valuing for an amount of Rs.16,000/-. The complainant subscribed the scheme vide Consumer No. MKV- No. VMKV019018280043 and the maturity date was on 06/08/15. On maturity he got only 5gm of pure gold at the rate of Rs.2,981/- per gram. In fact the rate of pure gold on the date was only Rs.2,521/-. The act of opposite parties caused a loss of Rs.2,300/- and they kept Rs.661/- with them, which was the balance remained in the account. Therefore they gave the gold worth Rs.12,000/- only. Hence the act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. So she caused a lawyer notice dtd.14/09/15 which were in vein. Hence this complaint.

          2) On receiving complaint, notice was properly sent to the opposite parties. Opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed version. The version of the opposite parties is as follows : Complaint is not maintainable. The complainant had joined Kanaka Vrishty Scheme after having a clear cut idea about the terms and conditions of the Scheme. Moreover, the complainant herself admits that she had to pay Rs.1,000/- per month for 15 months and on maturity date, the complainant will get gold coin (24 ct or 999  purity) equivalent to the amount offered by the Scheme. Besides, as per the scheme jointed by the complainant, the coin will be charged at a price prevailed at the time of 15^th installment and one installment (16^th) is a bonus paid by the company to the customer. As per the terms of the Scheme, the value of the gold at the time of 15^th installment was Rs.2,981/- (Muthoot Rate) excluding tax and hence the complainant is charged with the rate of gold prevailed at that time which he is well aware. Moreover, the complainant was also provided with a special discount of 2% of the base rate of gold. As per the terms and conditions in the form, it has made crystal clear that the Gold coin worth the amount paid will be given to the customer at the Muthoot rate prevalent on the date of 15^th installment. Being satisfied by the value and services provided by opposite parties, complainant had joined scheme. As per the scheme, the customer was provided with 5 gms of gold coin on the date of maturity with a special discount of 2% offered by the 2^nd opposite party. The amount charged by 2^nd opposite parties for 5 gms of gold coin is Rs.15,339/- including tax. A balance amount of Rs.661/- is still with 2^nd opposite party. It is respectfully submitted that the staff of 2^nd opposite party informed the complainant that the remaining balance amount can be utilized by the complainant either for buying a new gold coin by paying remaining amount or for joining a new MKV account or she could intimate her bank A/c No : to remit the balance amount to the bank account of the scheme customer. The complainant / customer assured that she will inform the 2^nd opposite party about further transactions later. Unfortunately, she made no contacts with the opposite parties besides sent a lawyer notice. The market price alone is not the selling price of the gold. Though 22 carat gold price is displayed in every jewellery as that day’s gold price, the ornaments are sold out after adding 8-25% of making charges on the market price depending on the items. That being the situation, when a dealer in gold in jeweler purchases gold from the market or from a customer for making ornaments of gold, he buys it at the prevailing spot price in the market. But once he sells the articles of gold such as coins/bars/ornaments made out of gold purchased from the market to the customer, the charges like processing/making/manufacturing & work losses are added to the market price and sell the same. Rate/value of 22 carat will be different from 24 carat gold coins. The said aspect is not considered by the complainant. The complainant may not expect same rate on gold coin of 22 carat and 24 carat. The price of gold coin may vary in accordance with the international gold price. The rate shown in the invoice is inclusive of conversion & minting charges, packing, transporting, insurance charges, VAT charge etc. However, the rate of gold coin provided by opposite party is almost at par or even less than others who sell the same 24 carat coins in the market. MMTC, which is a Govt. of India Enterprise having outlets in all major cities for selling metal articles, has sold gold coin (99.9 purity) at a higher rate when compared to the rate of opposite party. Providing the gold coins on the date of maturity to the customer at the price prevailed at the time of last installment payment, the price prevailing at the market on maturity will not be the same. So, the date of payment of last installment (15^th) becomes the date of purchase and the Muthoot gold coin price prevailing on that particular date will be applicable to the customers while collecting coins on maturity. This is communicated to all the customers through a written letter showing the price of the coin and the date of payment of last installment. There is no defective service or unfair trade practice or any sort of short comings attributed against the opposite parties and prayed for a  dismissal.

          3) The points for consideration are

                   a) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite

                       parties or not ?

                   b) Reliefs and costs ?

          4) When the case was posted for evidence the complainant filed proof affidavit in tune with complaint and the documents produced is marked as Ext. P1 to P5. Ext. P1 is the copy of Sales Invoice dtd.06/08/15; Ext. P2 is the Lawyer Notice dtd. 14/09/15; Ext. P3 is the Postal Receipt dtd.14/09/15; Ext. P4 (2 Nos) is the A/D cards and Ext. P5 is the Reply notice from the opposite parties dtd.25/09/15.  The opposite parties  also filed proof affidavit in tune with complaint and the documents produced are marked as Exts. R1 to R6. Ext. R1 is the copy of duly filled application form for opening Muthoot Kanaka Vrishty Scheme dtd.06/05/14; Ext. R2 is the copy of the letter dtd. 06/07/15 intimating delivery of Gold coin; Ext. R3 is the Sale invoice duplicate copy dtd. 06/08/15; Ext. R4 is the Monthly Report List of complainant; Ext. R5 is the Reply Notice dtd.25/09/15 to the complainant and Ext. R6 is the copy of comparison on the price at which gold coins are sold by different organization in the market on 29/12/16.

          5) Points :

          The case of the complainant is that she subscribed to “Kanaka Vrishty” scheme opened by opposite parties. They admit the same and Ext. R1 proves the same.

          2) The crux of the complainant is that as per the scheme she deposited the entire amount and entitled to get pure gold worth Rs.16,000/- . The opposite parties gave only 5 gm pure gold calculating rate per gram as Rs.2,981/-. In fact on the date pure gold rate was Rs.2,521/-. Hence she loss Rs.2,300/- altogether by fixing a higher rate than the actual prevailing market rate. Ext. P1 proves the sale of 5 gm gold coin for an amount of Rs.15,339/-. It is the further case of the complainant that as per Ext. P1 amount of Rs.661/- also remained with 1^st opposite party. The 1^st opposite party on the other hand states that the scheme is governed by the agreement between the parties as attached with the application form. Ext. R1 is the same. They state that they are only liable to pay “muthoot rate’ of gold. They further states that the market rate is not the selling price of the gold. It includes gold rate with 8 to 25 % of making charges processing, making, manufacturing and work losses is to be added and the complainant is not expected to get same rate of gold coin of 22 and 24 carats. The rate also includes conversion and minting charges, packing, transporting, insurance etc. They further admits that Rs.661/- is with them and their attempts to pay it to the complainant failed. We gone through Ext. R1 and terms and conditions,

          3) By way of the aforesaid scheme opposite parties collect money from public and promises to repay the same by way of pure gold at the maturity period. The terms and conditions are the crucial document explaining the scheme. Point No.7 states that ‘Muthoot rate’ of gold at the relevant date is given. Obviously Ext. R1 does not state that what is ‘muthoot rate’. At the culmination of the period of scheme they states that numerous charges and fees included in the rate to fix the rate of gold as muthoot rate. This being the crucial condition fixing the existence of the contact the same need to be properly explained to the general public and absence of the same in Ext. R1 permits them to fix the rate of gold at their whims and fancies after collecting huge amount from general public. Therefore we find that non explanation of ‘Muthoot rate’  per – sc leads to an unfair trade practice enabling the opposite party to have a high hand over the general public who attract to the scheme. The condition materially mislead the public conceiving the price at which the product or like product has been ordinarily sold or provided and for this purpose, a representation as to price shall be deemed to refer to the price at which the product have been sold by sellers or provided by suppliers generally in the relevant market. Moreover the price is not clearly stated and the ‘Muthoot rate’ is not clarified to fix the  price of the product provided by opposite parties. Therefore the act of opposite parties with regard to non-explain fixing of ‘muthoot rate’ on mutually agreed parameters amounts to unfair trade practice and the point is answered accordingly.

          4) Moreover it is pertinent to go through recital M 15 and 16 of Ext. R1. These conditions clearly express the intention behind the making of the scheme. It permits them to unilaterally alter the terms and conditions of the scheme without prior notice to the customer and they are bound to abide by such condition altered. Further the condition deems that the customer who signs to the agreement deemed to have read, understood and agreed to these terms. These are the noteworthy recital permitting them to falsely interfere with the right of the customers, that too without having consensus between the parties. Therefore, as we already mentioned, the act of the opposite parties amounts unfair trade practice. Moreover Ext. R1 does not bear the name and signature of the 1^st party represented there in, who is 1^st opposite party here in. The act of the opposite parties specifically caused mental agony and loss to the complainant. At the period of maturity opposite parties have to close the Account and to return the amount Rs.661/- without waiting for a requisition from the party especially when Ext. P1 is there. The failure to do so also amounts to deficiency in service especially when the opposite parties are served with Ext. P2 lawyer notice. Opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant, since their Act caused loss and mental agony to the complainant as proved.

          4) Considering the above discussion and going through entire evidence, we are of the view that complainant established a cogent case entitling him get Rs.2,300/- as balance amount and Rs.661/- unpaid amount and cost and compensation.

          In the result complaint is allowed and opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to repay Rs.2,300/- (Rupees Two thousand and three hundred only) and Rs.661/- (Rupees Six hundred and sixty one only) with 9% interest together from 06/08/15 till realization. Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) as compensation with Rs.5,000/-  (Rupees Five thousand only) toward cost within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Failing in which, total amount of cost and compensation will carry 6% interest from the date of this order.

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 31^st day of March 2022.

    Sd/-                                                                                          Sd/-            

Sreeja S                                                                                    C.T. Sabu

Member                                                                                    President

Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits :

Ext. P1 copy of Sales Invoice dtd.06/08/15

Ext. P2 Lawyer Notice dtd. 14/09/15

Ext. P3 Postal Receipt dtd.14/09/15

Ext. P4 (2 Nos) A/D cards

Ext. P5 Reply notice from the opposite parties dtd.25/09/15. 

Opposite Parties’ Exhibits :

Ext. R1 copy of duly filled application form dtd.06/05/14

Ext. R2 copy of the letter dtd. 06/07/15 intimating delivery of Gold coin

Ext. R3 Sale invoice duplicate copy dtd. 06/08/15

Ext. R4 Monthly Report List of complainant

Ext. R5 Reply Notice dtd.25/09/15 to the complainant

Ext. R6 copy of comparison on the price at which gold coins are sold by

             different organization in the market on 29/12/16.

           Id/-

          Member