Delhi

New Delhi

CC/78/2017

Rakesh Chadha - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

11 Mar 2019

ORDER

 

                                             CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

                                               (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

                                       ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

                                                                                 NEW DELHI-110001

 

 

Case No.C.C./78 /2017                                                                                             Dated:

In the matter of:

Rakesh Chaddha

R/o-B- 801, Nirala  Eden Park

Ahinsh Kahnd, II Near  Rail  Vihar

Indirapuram, Distt. Ghaziabad (U.P.) 201010                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        …… Complainant

 

                                                   Versus

 

Sh. Susheel Ansal Chairmen& whole time Director

Ansal Properties & Bhawan, 16 Kasturba Gandhi Marg,

New Delhi- 110001

RESI – Vishranti  26 Feroj Shah Road,

New Delhi- 110001

Complaint under the provision of 12 Consumer protection

Act 1986 as amended up to date

 

 

                                                                                                                       …….Opposite Party

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H.M.VYAS :MEMBER

                       ORDER

        Complainant has filed this complaint before this Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (the Act) against the OP M/s Ansal properties & infrastructure ltd. alleging that the complainant deposited an amount of Rs. 14,00,000/- on 08.01.2014 for one year on which 12% interest quarterly was assured by the OP.  The date of maturity of the said fix deposit was 07.01.2015.  When the complainant did not get back his money, he wrote email dated 12.05.2016 informing the same and that from the date of maturity the interest has not been remitted to him on the balance principle amount.  It is also informed that only 35 % of the total amount that is Rs. 4,90,000/- was received and rests of the amount was outstanding. It was also informed that as per OP’s deposits scheme interest yield per annum is 15.07. Request for payment of dues was made.  The complainant visited the office time and again and also sent email dated 30.06.2016. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP following prayer has been made:-

1) That the respondent may kindly be directed to return the deposit amount Rs. 9,10,000/- ( balance).

2) That the respondent may kindly be directedto paythe interest from till the date on Rs. 9,10,000/- @ 15.07% which is as percompany scheme for yield annexure for 3 year (minus interestpaid from Jan. 14 to 7^th June 15)

3) The respondentmay kindlydirected to pay a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/-to the complainantas compensation for harassmentmental agony and painand interest paid by the under signed which be can borroweddue to not debtly my moneyfrom Ansal Property.

4) The respondent may kindly directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/-to the complainant as cost of litigation,

1. Rs.3000/- for meditation centre, cost of legal documents etc advocate fees.

The OP was noticed.OP filed written statement/ version to the complaint and denied all allegations.It is stated that the OP has filed and application for extension of file for repayment of the deposit under Rule 44 of the Company Law Board Regulation 1991 read with section 73 and 74 of the Companies Act, 2013 before Hon’ble Company Law Board vide petition no. 25/9/2014.The Hon’ble Board vide final orders dated 30.12.2014 sanctioned the scheme of repayment to the fixed deposit holders and direct the OP to make the repayment of fixed deposit.Thereafter, the OP filed CA no. 15/2016 before the company law board apprising that the OP could not make payment due to lack of funds and prayed for extension of time.As per the orders dated 13.01.2017 the Hon’ble Company Law Board extended the liability of company to pay the interest amount till June 2017.

The Hon’ble National Company law Tribunal vide orders dated 13.04.2017 extended the further time for payment for next 3 months.The prayer to dismiss the complaint has been made alleging that the complainant is not a consumer being an investor.

The complainant filed evidence by way of affidavit. Despite opportunities to OP to file evidence was not filed and even the directionsfor personal presence of authorised representative was not complied. On 27.02.2019 the Ld counsel for OP appeared and again requested for adjournment for presence of the AR which was strongly opposed on behalf of the complainant. The OP did not file evidence despite opportunities. Both the parties addressed oral arguments.

We have considered the material placed before us and the arguments addressed.

During the arguments the complainant has drawn our attention on the copy of warrant no. 174968 issued by the OP company where from it is reflected that the date of maturity of the deposit has been extended to 31.03.2019 at their own. This shows that the OP intends to withhold the complainant’s money. It is further argued that the OP has not even acted as per various orders of the Hon’ble Company Law Board and avoided the payment of balance 65% of the complainant’s deposits with interest.The complainant, a senior citizen of 69 years of age, is a heart patient and has undergone by-pass surgery and is short of funds even for treatment.It is also pointed out by the Counsel for the complainant that as per OP’s own scheme of fixed deposit for 1 year to 3 year, interest yielding rate is 15.07%.Alleging deficiency in service request to allow the complaint has been made.

Per contra, the OP has referred and relied on the contentions made in the written statement.The OP failed to file the evidence despite giving opportunities. The contentions made by the complainant have remained un-rebutted and we do not find any reason to disbelieve.In the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold the OP guilty of deficiency in service and direct as under :-

1) OP to pay the balance deposit of Rs. 9,10,000/- with interest @12%after deducting the interest paid for the period Jan,2014 to June, 2015 till date of realization.

2) To pay compensation of Rs. 25,000/- for mental and physical agony including litigation cost to the complainant.

The orders shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

The complaint case and the pending applications are disposed of in above terms.

Copy of the order may be forwarded to the parties to the case free of cost as statutorily required. 

Announced in open Forum on :  11/03/2019

The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

File be consigned to record room.

 

 

  (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                        PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                               (H M VYAS)

                   MEMBER                                                                           MEMBER