Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/58/2020

Miss. Vidya Rashmi - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.M/S KFJ Gold & Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Rep. By its Managing Director and Director - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.G.G.Pillai

09 Mar 2023

ORDER

                                      Date of Complaint Filed : 18.03.2020

                                      Date of Reservation      : 23.02.2023

                                     Date of Order               : 09.03.2023

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.58 /2020

THURSDAY, THE 9^th DAY OF MARCH 2023

Miss. Vidya Rashmi,

G-1, Jaisuya Building,

# 113/65, Vellala Street,

Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600024.                                                                               ... Complainant                

..Vs..

1.M/s KFJ Gold & Diamonds Pvt Ltd.,

   Rep. by its Managing Director,

   No.36, TNHB Complex,

   180, Luz Church Road, Mylapore,

   Chennai 600 004.

 

2.M/s. KFJ Gold & Diamonds Pvt. Ltd.,

   Rep. by its Director,

   AC/3, 2^nd Aenue Annanagar,

   Chennai 600 040.                                                                                                            ...  Opposite Parties

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. G.G. Pillai

Counsel for the Opposite Parties     : Exparte

 

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

ORDER

Pronounced by Member-II, Thiru. S. Nandagopalan., B.Sc., MBA.,   

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Parties to refund the cost of 20 grams gold ornaments at the market rate on 10.02.2019 which was due to the Complainant under the scheme and to pay the difference of cost of gold ornaments as on 10.02.2019 and on the date of realization of cost and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation to the Complainant for the mental agony, pain, harassment, hardship, wrongful loss etc along with cost.

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

The Complainant submitted that she joined the gold scheme with the opposite party and she is a beneficiary under their Gold Bond / Investment Scheme by virtue of their cash Bill No.5699 and 524 both dated 10/02/2014 for an amount of Rs. 20,341/- each including VAT (Total Rs. 40,682/-) issued by 2nd Opposite party towards cost of 20 grams gold ornaments to be delivered on 10/2/2019. They also promised and assured that they will deliver 20 grams of gold ornaments at our choice @ Rs.2014 per gram irrespective of the market rate of gold at the time of maturity i.e on 10/02/2019 towards the final benefit of the scheme. The Complainant further stated that while joining the scheme opposite party said that it is a registered reputed Company doing gold and diamond business for more than 40 years. On believing their words, Complainant invested on 20 grams of gold ornaments and on maturity after 5 years of the scheme expecting to use the same for her sister's marriage Ms.Girija. The Complainant submitted that the Opposite parties failed to deliver the ornaments as promised on maturity and they sought three months time as the fashion selected was out of stock and promised to waive the wastage and making charges and also in the same way Opposite parties extended the time and not yet delivered the ornaments ordered in contrary to their promise. The Complainant submitted that the Opposite Parties intentionally failed to deliver the ornaments as promised while receiving cost of the same five years ago, with a view of illegal enrichment. Having received full value for 20 grams of gold ornaments, at the agreed rate of Rs.2014/- per gram and the failure on the part of the Opposite parties to deliver the ornaments when it was due when the complainant requested the cost of the ornaments they agreed to credit the same to bank Account directly and obtained bank particulars vide letter dated 19/8/2019. The opposite parties also failed to credit the amount in Complainant Bank Account despite several reminders. Further the Complainant submits that even after collecting the cost of the ornaments 5 years ago, the Opposite party failed to deliver the same by causing mental agony and hardship amounting to deficiency of service. Hence this 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-5. Despite sufficient notice served on the Opposite party the Opposite party failed to appear before this commission and they have been called absent and set Ex-parte.

4.    Points for Consideration

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

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

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

Point No.1:

5.    On perusal of records it is pertinent to note that the Complainant joined the gold scheme with the 2^nd Opposite party on 10.02.2014 vide cash Bill No.5699 by paying a sum of Rs.20,341/- for 10 grams as seen in Ex.A-1 page No.1 for which the 2^nd Opposite Party issued a bond for the same in the name of the Complainant for 10 grams with the maturity date as 10.02.2019 @ 2014 per gram as found in Ex.A-2. It is appropriate to note that the Complainant averred stating that she joined 2 Gold schemes out of which only one bill is substantial and the other bill No.524 dated 10.02.2014 as noticed in Ex.A-1, page No.2 does not have relevant details eventually no bond has been issued henceforth it is not considerable. The contention of the Complainant is that the Opposite parties failed to comply with the commitment by not delivering the ornaments as per the Gold bond issued by the Opposite parties as seen in Ex.A-2. Moreover the Complainant alleged that the Opposite parties sought 3 months time to deliver the ornaments but on the contrary they kept on dragging the time with lame excuses. Aggrieved by the Opposite parties response, Complainant issued a letter dated 19.08.2019 as seen in Ex.A-3 stating that the opposite parties failed to deliver the ornaments even after taking relevant time. Furthermore in that letter to the Opposite Party, Complainant demanded to settle the money by providing the account details. As per the privity between the Complainant and the Opposite parties it is the the Opposite parties sole discretion to fulfil the commitment by delivering the 10 grams @ Rs.2014/- per gram after the maturity date i.e 5 years as mentioned in the bond. On careful observations of the Complainant averments and the context of the case it is admissible that the Opposite parties were indulged in Unfair trade practice and deficiency of service towards the Complainant causing mental agony by not delivering the ornaments as per the Gold bond Investment scheme. Hence by seeing the facts and circumstance of the present case we are of a considered view that the affirmations made by the Complainant on the Opposite party is justifiable. Since the Opposite parties have committed Deficiency of service and unfair trade practice they are liable to compensate the Complainant. Point No.1 is answered.          

Point No.2:

6.     As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Opposite Parties, the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally  liable to pay the cost of 20 grams of gold at the market rate as on 10.02.2019 which was due to the Complainant under the scheme with interest at the rate of 9% on the amount arrived on 10.02.2019 till the date of realization and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/-  as compensation for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice committed by the Opposite Parties along with a sum of  Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the litigation. Accordingly Point Nos. 2 and 3 are answered. 

In the result, the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally  directed to pay the cost of 10 grams of gold at the market rate as on 10.02.2019 which was due to the Complainant under the scheme with interest at the rate of 9% on the amount arrived as on 10.02.2019 till the date of realization and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) as compensation for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice committed by the Opposite Parties along with a sum of  Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) towards cost of the litigation to the Complainant, within 8 weeks  from the date of receipt of the order.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

          In the result this complaint is allowed in part. 

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 9^th of March 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	10.02.2014	Cash receipts No.5699 & 524
Ex.A2	10.02.2014	Gold Bond issued by Opposite Party in Receipt No.5699 alone
Ex.A3	19.08.2019	Letter issued to the Opposite Party
Ex.A4	20.08.2019	A/D cards & Articles tracking details
Ex.A5	03.09.2019	Reminder letter to Opposite Party

 

 

 

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

 

NIL

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT