DATE OF FILING : 23/07/2013. DATE OF S/R : 20/08/2013. DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 23/12/2013. AJOY HALDER, S/O Rabindranath Halder, Belur ESI (TB) Hospital, P.O. Sapuipara, P.S. Bally, District –Howrah, 711 227---------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT. - Versus - 1. Amazan Agro Procucts Ltd. Now Presently known as Amazan Capital Limited, Infinity Infortch Park Tower – 1, 2nd Floor, Plot no. A3, Block – GP, Sector – V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata 700 091. 2. Ranjit Saha, S/O Lt. Aditya Saha, 43/17/B, Bidhan Pally, Belur Dharmatala Road, P.S. Bally Dist Howrah 711 202. 3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ghoshpara Branch, D.C. Neogi Road (North), Belur Pin 711 227.----------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES. P R E S E N T President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS. Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee. Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha. F I N A L O R D E R 1. Complainant. Shri Ajoy Halder, 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. nos. 1 & 2 to pay Rs. 2,31,000/- being the principal and interest amount, along with further interest till actual payment, to pay Rs. 5,00,000/- in total as compensation for causing mental and physical harassment along with Rs. 25,000/- as litigation costs and other order or orders as the Forum may deem fit and proper. 2. Brief facts to the case is that on being convinced by O.P. no. 2, complainant invested Rs. 2,00,000/- in the O.P. no. 1’s company by way of issuing a cheque being no. 845150 dated 10-02-2010 drawn on SBI, Ghoshpara Branch, being O.P. no. 3, in favour of O.P. no. 1 vide copy of bank statement is annexed. O.P. no. 1 issued a certificate being no. AC-SRDCT-SR1-SCII-E-2632, folio no. 2116 and one post dated cheque of Rs. 2,00,000/- being no. 002632 dated 12-02-2013 vide Annexure ‘P2’ series collectively. And O.P. no. 1 pad interest amount of Rs. 2,500/- for the period of 27 months from 19-03-2010 to 24-04-2012. But no interest was paid since 28-04-2012 till date by O.P. no. 1 to the complainant. It is further stated by the complainant that after receiving the first monthly interest, O.P. no. 1 again convinced him to make further investment of Rs. 20,000/-. For that purpose, complainant again issued one cheque of Rs. 20,000/- being no. 985538 dated 08-05-2010 drawn on the same branch of S.B.I. i.e., O.P. no. 3. O.P. no. 1 again issued one certificate being no. AC-SRDCT-SR1-D-5339, folio no. 2116 and one post dated cheque of Rs. 2,00,000/- being maturity amount vide no. 003333 dated 12-05-2023 in favour of the complainant. In both cases complainant’s mother is the nominee vide Annexure ‘P3’ series collectively. Again, on being convinced by O.P. no. 1, complainant invested a further amount of Rs. 1,000/- for which O.P. no. 1 issued one certificate being no. AC-SRDCT-SR1-SC1-D-5918, folio no. 2116 and one post dated cheque of Rs. 10,000/-, being maturity value, dated 22-05-2023 vide Annexure ‘P4’ series collectively. After receiving three installment of interest amount, O.P. no. 1 could again convince the complainant and complainant further invested an amount of Rs. 10,000/- by cash. O.P. no. 1 again issued a certificate being no. CPSA 0000000075, folio no. 34 and O.P. no. 1 promised to pay 15% dividend on the said investment at the time of maturity i.e., on 28-06-2013 vide Annexure ‘P5’ collectively. But it has become very unfortunate when complainant did not get any interest since May,2012 towards the investment of Rs. 2,00,000/-, being the first investment till date and even after its maturity i.e., 12-02-2013, O.P. no. 1 has not paid the maturity value of the said certificate being no. AC-SRD CT-SR1-SCII-E-2632, folio no. 2116. It is alleged by the complainant that only to gain complainant’s faith and belief, O.P. no. 1 issued all post-dated cheques to collect various amounts from the complainant. It is nothing but an unfair trade practice which was adopted by O.P. no. 1 to make some illegal and unlawful gain. Complainant is now rather afraid of the act that the cheque issued by O.P. no. 1 on different future dates i.e., on 12-05-2023 and 22-05-2023 in favour of the complainant will be dishonoured. However, complainant went to the office of the O.P. no. 1 on 05-06-2013 to get his maturity amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- but O.P. no. 1 informed him that cheque has not been prepared and he should come after few days. Even he requested on 14-06-2013, but O.P. no. 1 remained silent without giving him his maturity amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. Finding no other alternative and being frustrated, complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief. 3. Notices were served. Although only O.P. no. 2 appeared once but none of the O.Ps. filed any written version. Accordingly, the case heard ex parte. 4. Upon pleadings of complainant two points arose for determination : i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ? ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? DECISION WITH REASONS : 5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Complainant made three investments by cheque drawn on O.P. no. 3 which were duly encashed by O.P. no. 1 without any problem. So, there is no deficiency on the part of the O.P. no. 3. O.P. no. 2 is the agent of O.P. no. 1. He convinced the complainant on behalf of O.P no. 1. O.P. no. 1 is the principal. Accordingly, for each and every act of O.P. no. 2, O.P. no. 1 is vicariously liable and responsible. By way of issuing certificates in favour of the complainant, O.P.no. 1 made some promises to the complainant which O.P. no. 1 miserably failed to comply with. To receive some amount with a certain promise is equal to a contract. And even after receiving the summons of this Forum, O.P no. 1 has never appeared or filed any written version which clearly shows that they have nothing to put forward in their favour. And all allegations of the complainant levelled against them remained unchallenged and uncontroverted. A person with a hope to get little more interest amount has invested his hard-earned money with O.P. no. 1. And O.P. no. 1 has showed tremendous negligence towards him by way of not giving his maturity amount, which has compelled us to accept complainant’s view that O.P. no. 1 would definitely fail to give all future maturity amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- ( to be paid on 12-02-2023) Rs. 10,000/- to be paid on 12-05-2023 ) Rs. 15,000/- ( not paid on 28-06-2013). Accordingly, we hold O.P. no. 1 to be deficient in providing service as well as O.P. no. 1 has adopted unfair trade practice which should not be allowed to be perpetuated. Points under consideration are accordingly decided. Hence, O R D E R E D That the C. C. Case No. 242 of 2013 ( HDF 242 of 2013 ) be allowed ex parte with costs against the O.P. nos. 1 & 2 and dismissed against O.P. no. 3 without costs. That the O.P. nos. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.2,31,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order. That the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation costs to the complainant within one month from the date of this order. If the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 fail to comply the above order in toto within the stipulated period, the entire amount of Rs.2,43,000/- shall carry an interest @ 10% p.a. till full realization. The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period. Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule. DICTATED & CORRECTED BY ME. ( Jhumki Saha ) Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah. ( Jhumki Saha ) ( P. K. Chatterjee ) (T.K. Bhattacharya ) Member, Member, President, C.D.R.F.,Howrah. C.D.R.F.,Howrah. C.D.R.F.,Howrah |