Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/309/2022

P. Ramakrishnan - Complainant(s)

Versus

TN Power Finance and Infrastructure Development Corporation - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

02 Jan 2023

ORDER

                                                               Date of Complaint Filed : 20.07.2022

                                                               Date of Reservation      : 20.12.2022

                                                               Date of Order               : 02.01.2023

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                                 : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,                 :  MEMBER  I 

                      THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,          : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.309 /2022

MONDAY, THE 2^nd DAY OF JANUARY 2023

P. Ramakrishnan,

Flat No.4B, D.No.42/45,

Kannappa Nagar, 2^nd Main Road,

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai -600 041.                                                                                                                             ... Complainant           

..Vs..

Tamilnadu Power Finance,

and Infrastructure Development

Corporation Ltd., ‘TUFIDCO

POWERFIN TOWER’, 490/3-4,

Anna Salai, Nandanam,

Chennai – 600 035.                                                                                                                           ...  Opposite Party

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : Party in Person

Counsel for the Opposite Party       : Exparte

 

On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Complainant in Person, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and prays to direct the Opposite Party to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental tension and agony along with cost of the complaint.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

 The Complainant submitted that four F.D.Rs. as detailed below were presented for renewal. The Complainant was told that since the F.D.Rs were presented one year after the maturity date the said F.D.Rs could be renewed only with effect from the date of presentation and not with retrospective effect:

Sl.        Old              Maturity                  New                  Renewal           Amount

No    F.D.R. No         Date           F.D.R No         Date                Rs.

 

1.    RAA324028      21.03.2020     9091449      06.09.2021     15,00,000/-

2.    RAA324032      20.03.2020    9091260       06.09.2021      12,00,000/-

3.    RAA324027      20.03.2020     9091349      06.09.2021        3,00,000/-

4.    RAA349813      28.09.2020     9092172      08.09.2021        1,00,000/-

The letter dated 25.01.2022, was sent by the Complainant to the Opposite Party requesting for renewing the aforesaid F.D.Rs. with retrospective effect for which the Complainant received a letter dated 14.2.2022 from the Opposite Party. Some banks like S.B.I. have auto renewal facility and Finance Companies like Sundaram Finance and Sundaram Home Finance renew F.D.Rs  presented even one year after maturity date.  Hence prayed to renew the FDRs with retrospective effect since the deposit amount, even after the dated of maturity was only with the Opposite Party and utilized for their business. Hence the complaint.

3. The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents were marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-15. The Opposite Party did not appear before this Commission even after sufficient notice was served and remained set exparte.

Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:

The Complainant submitted that he had made four Fixed Deposits from the Opposite Party and their renewal dates are as detailed below.

Sl.	Old	Maturity	New	Renewal	Amount
No	F.D.R. No	Date	F.D.R No	Date	Rs.
1.	RAA324028	21.03.2020	9091449	06.09.2021	15,00,000/-
2.	RAA324032	20.03.2020	9091260	06.09.2021	12,00,000/-
3.	RAA324027	20.03.2020	9091349	06.09.2021	3,00,000/-
4.	RAA349813	28.09.2020	9092172	08.09.2021	1,00,000/-

 

According to the Complainant the said 4 Fixed Deposits matured one year from the respective dates of deposit and renewed only with effect from the date of presentation and not with retrospective effects i.e., on their respective maturity dates. The Complainant had sent a letter dated 25.01.2022, Ex.A-1 to the Opposite Party requesting for renewal of the said Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) with retrospective effects. In response to the letter of the Complainant, the Opposite Party had issued a reply letter dated 14.02.2022,  Ex.A-2 stating that in case of renewal application received after three months from the date of maturity the same will be treated as fresh deposit and the interest rate prevailing on the date of receipt of the application will be applicable.

        The contention of the Complainant was that some Banks like SBI have auto renewal facility and finance companies like Sundaram Finance and Sundaram Home Finance renew the FDRs even after one year from the maturity date and submitted Exs.A-3 to Ex.A-15. Further the relief sought by the Complainant is to renew the FDRs with retrospective effects crediting arrears of interest in his savings bank account since the deposit amount even after the date of maturity is only with the Opposite Party and utilised for their business.

        Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the Exhibits marked on the side of the  Complainant it is seen that the Complainant had not submitted renewal of the Fixed Deposits within three months on their respective date of maturity and had sent a requisition to renew the FDRs only on 25.01.2022. It is not clear whether there is auto renewal facility of the FDRs with the Opposite Party or if the Complainant had opted for such renewal. Just because the auto renewal facility is available with some banks and financial institutions the Complainant cannot claim as a matter of right  to renew the FDRs from their date of maturity when no such request of renewal was made by the Complainant immediately after their maturity. It is also not the case  of the Complainant that he opted to auto renewal and that the Opposite Party had not auto renewed it. On the other hand if no such auto renewal facility is available with the Opposite Party,  it is for the Complainant to make a request for renewal of FDRs. Hence, the claim of the Complainant to renew the FDRs with retrospective effect is not sustainable. The Opposite Party had renewed the FDRs on the requisition  made by the Complainant.  Hence the Opposite Party had not committed deficiency of service as alleged by the Complainant and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered.

Point No.2 & 3:

As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs claimed in the complaint and for any other relief/s. Accordingly Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.

 

In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 2^nd of January 2023.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

Ex.A1	25.01.2022	Letter by Complainant to Opposite Party
Ex.A2	14.02.2022	Letter from Opposite Party to Complainant
Ex.A3	19.04.2022	F.D.R from S.B.I (auto renewal)
Ex.A4	27.04.2022	F.D.R from S.B.I (auto renewal)
Ex.A5	27.04.2022	F.D.R from S.B.I (auto renewal)
Ex.A6	05.07.2022	F.D.R from S.B.I (auto renewal)
Ex.A7	05.07.2022	F.D.R from S.B.I (auto renewal)
Ex.A8	05.07.2022	F.D.R from S.B.I (auto renewal)
Ex.A9	05.07.2022	F.D.R from S.B.I (auto renewal)
Ex.A10	09.09.2021	F.D.R from Sundaram Finance
Ex.A11	09.09.2021	F.D.R from Sundaram Finance
Ex.A12	04.09.2021	F.D.R from Sundaram Finance Limited
Ex.A13	04.09.2021	F.D.R from Sundaram Home Finance Limited
Ex.A14	03.09.2021	F.D.R from Sundaram Finance Limited
Ex.A15	03.09.2021	F.D.R from Sundaram Finance Limited

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

 

NIL

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT