Date of Filing : 14/07/2014
Order No. 26 dt. 18/01/2018
The case of the complainant in brief is that the o.p.no.1 was running a business in the name of Pailan Park Development Authority. The o.p.no.2 used to work as an agent of the company by collecting monthly installment from the depositors including from the complainant. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.8,190/- by paying in installments. The o.p.2 delivered the receipts after obtaining the receipts issued by o.p.1. The complainant requested the o.p.1 for withdrawal of the amount paid by her but no fruitful result was achieved for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.p.1 refund the amount along with compensation of Rs.500/- and litigation cost.
O.p.no.1 contested the case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the o.p.no.1 has been running various business in West Bengal in course of its operations, it took deposits from various members of the public in the form of recurring deposits or fixed deposits or investment in the form of debentures. The o.p.no.1 was running the business as per law but SEBI held that they were not doing the business in accordance with law. Due to demands made by the depositors for recovery of the amount several depositors filed cases before Hon’ble High Court and as per the order of the Hon’ble High Court o.p.no.1 not in a position to deal with their business including the transfer of assets by the said company. In spite of such order if this Forum passes any order the said order cannot be complied with by the o.p.no.1. On the basis of the said fact o.p.no.1 prayed for dismissal of the case.
O.p.no.2 contested the case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the o.p.no.2 acted as an agent of o.p.no.1 and he never received the amount from the complainant for himself but he deposited the amount to o.p.no.1 thereby he cannot be held liable for non-payment of the amount to the complainant.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided:-
- Whether the complainant paid an amount of Rs.8,190/- to the o.p.no.1?
- Whether the o.p.1 failed to pay the amount after the maturity period?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the o.p.1?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant argued that the o.p.no.1 was running a business in the name of Pailan Park Development Authority. The o.p.no.2 used to work as an agent of the company by collecting monthly installment from the depositors including from the complainant. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.8,190/- by paying in installments. The o.p.2 delivered the receipts after obtaining the receipts issued by o.p.1. The complainant requested the o.p.1 for withdrawal of the amount paid by her but no fruitful result was achieved for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.p.1 refund the amount along with compensation of Rs.500/- and litigation cost.
Ld. Lawyer for the o.p.no.1 argued that the o.p.no.1 has been running various businesses in West Bengal in course of its operations, it took deposits from various members of the public in the form of recurring deposits or fixed deposits or investment in the form of debentures. The o.p.no.1 was running the business as per law but SEBI held that they were not doing the business in accordance with law. Due to demands made by the depositors for recovery of the amount several depositors filed cases before Hon’ble High Court and as per the order of the Hon’ble High Court o.p.no.1 not in a position to deal with their business including the transfer of assets by the said company. In spite of such order if this Forum passes any order the said order cannot be complied with by the o.p.no.1. On the basis of the said fact o.p.no.1 prayed for dismissal of the case.
Ld lawyer for the o.p.no.2 argued that the o.p.no.2 acted as an agent of o.p.no.1 and he never received the amount from the complainant for himself but he deposited the amount to o.p.no.1 thereby he cannot be held liable for non-payment of the amount to the complainant.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant on being attracted with the advertisement of the o.p.no.1 deposited total amount of Rs.8,190/- After the maturity of the period of the said amount the complainant requested the o.p.1 to refund the said amount. But the o.p.no.1 did not refund the amount for which the complainant filed this case. Though it was argued by o.p.no.1 that as per the order of the Hon’ble High Court the o,p,no.1 is not in a position to transfer their property including the operation of the bank account thereby the o.p.no.1 is not in a position to pay the amount claimed by the complainant. It is true that Hon’ble High Court passed an order in respect of the writ petition filed by different depositors in respect of the scam prevailed towards the chit fund amount withdrawn from different depositors. Hon’ble High Court did not pass any order that this Forum cannot pass any order in respect of claim of the depositors including the complainant of this case. It appears from the record that the complainant paid the amount to the o.p.no.1 and after expiry of the maturity period the complainant has not been provided with the amount as paid by the complainant. In view of the facts and circumstances stated above we hold that the complainant will be entitled to get the refund of the amount paid by her.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, it is ordered,
that the case no.476/2014 is allowed on contest with cost against o.p.no.1 and dismissed against o.p.no.2. The o.p.no.1 is directed to refund the amount of Rs.8,190/- to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.500/-within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
