DATE OF FILING : 28 -01-2016.
DATE OF S/R : 18-04-2016.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 16-12-2016.
Shri Sailendranath Bagchi,
son of late Sitala Charan Bagchi,
residing at 26/2, Baje Shibpur Road,
P.O. and P.S. Shibpur,
Howrah 711102. ……………………………………………………..COMPLAINANT.
Pailan Park Development Authority Ltd.,
having its registered office at
127 Kankulia Road,
Kolkata 700029 and
having its branch office at
33, Nabin Mukherjee Lane,
P.O. and P.S. Shibpur,
District Howrah,
PIN 711102………………………….……………………………….OPPOSITE PARTY.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. Complainant, namely, Sri Sailendranath Bagchi, by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p. to refund the redemption amount of five policies totaling Rs. 41,962/-, to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for causing physical and mental harassment along with other relief or reliefs as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
2. Brief fact of the case is that complainant made five investments under Pailan Gems and Jewellery Ltd., o.p., which were matured during the year 2013 to 2014. The o.p. issued certificates vide Annexures in favour of the complainant. At the time of deposit, the o.p. promised to pay the maturity amounts but the payments were not made. Complainant repeatedly went to the office of o.p. but on different pleas they have returned the complainant without giving their financial benefit. Due to this non action and gross negligence on the part of the o.p., complainant had been compelled to face financial stringency as with that matured amount , they were supposed to meet their day to day expenditure, medical expenditure, etc. which are really at stake. So, finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief.
4. Notice was served. The o.p appeared and filed written version. Accordingly, case was heard on contest.
5. Upon pleading of both parties two points arose for determination :
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
6. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the complaint petition along with annexures as well as original documents filed by the complainant, w/v with the annexures filed by the o.p. and noted their contents. It is stated by o.p. that in W. P. no. 11795 (W) of 2015, W.P.no. 316119 (W) of 2014, W.P. no. 34339 (W) of 2014, Hon’ble High Court , Calcutta has restrained o.p . from disbursing any property/ wealth. Complainant made five investments under the o.p. company for which the o.p promised to pay the matured amount at the time of maturity of the certificates vide Annexures A, B & C. Accordingly the company was restrained from creating any encumbrance on its property by way of alienating, disbursing and or selling the same. So the o.p.is not in a position to repay any claim of its investors. But here we are to keep in mind that the instant petitioner is not a party to the above mentioned writ petition and Section 3 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has given the consumers, like this instant petitioner,an additional, speedier remedy to get an early result from the Consumer Forum. It is a fact that o.p. has failed to pay the said amount with respect to the five certificates in question for which complainant felt financial problem. Because, people invest their hard earned money in a reputed company to get the benefit at their need. O.p. has miserably failed to keep promise which they made on the face of the certificates, pass books etc. issued by them in favour of complainant. For o.p.’s gross negligence in discharging duties, complainant had to suffer a lot for the crying need of money and complainant has lost all faith on the O.P. Sacrificing many present enjoyments involving monetary expenditure, complainant made that investments for maintaining his day to day expenses smoothly. If that criteria is not fulfilled due to o.p.’ssevere negligence, complainant are thereby, truly prejudiced which can be very well understood by a man of common prudence. O.p. has miserably failedto keep promise which certainly amounts to deficiency inservice coupled with unfair trade practice on their part which should not be allowed to be perpetuated for an indefinite period. Due to non payment of maturity payment, complainant has lost all faith in the O.P., company and prayed for the refund of his matured amounts of investments before this Forum. And we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant should be allowed against O.P. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 31 of 2016 ( HDF 31 of 2016 ) be allowed on contest with costs against the O.P.
That the O.P. is directed to pay the matured amounts of five certificates being Rs. 41,962/- to the complainant in terms of the certificates in question along with due interest till actual payment within one month from this order.
The complainant do get an award of Rs. 3,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation costs within one month from this order i.d. amount shall carry an interest @ 8% p.a. till actual payment.
The complainant is at liberty to put the final order into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( Jhumki Saha)
Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
