Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 610.
Instituted on : 17.12.2018.
Decided on : 15.12.2020.
Ashwani Kumar Katyal age 62 years, resident of House No.1198A, Jagdish Colony, Rohtak(Haryana).
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Branch Manager, Axis Bank, Munjal Complex, Delhi Road, Rohtak.
- Regional Manager, Axis Bank, SCO No.10, Sector-10, Panchkula(Haryana).
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
MS.TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.S.K.Raman, Advocate for the complainant.
Mrs. Loveleen N. Gupta Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant is having Account No.204010100015385 in the bank of the respondents. On the request of the employee of the respondent bank named Sh. Saurabh Arora, the complainant invested his money in Axis Fixed Income Opportunity Funds Growth Scheme saying that it is a debt fund. The complainant invested Rs.11 lacs in the above said fund on dated 24.08.2017 after retired from the post of Deputy District Attorney. After one year the complainant came to know that only Rs.50316/- has been given on the said scheme, whereas in fixed deposit interest could be earned to Rs.77000/- and complainant suffered loss of Rs.26684/- from the scheme of fixed deposit. On 27.08.2018 the complainant submitted in writing to the said employee of the opposite party to redeem the full amount of Rs.1150316.35P in his saving bank account but inspite of redeeming the said amount in the saving account of the complainant, opposite party again invested the said amount in the Axis Credit Risk Fund without the consent of the complainant. On asking of complainant, the said employee reconverted and redeemed the invested amount alongwith earlier interest and after one month the said employee deposited Rs.1141227/- instead of Rs.1150316/- after deducting Rs.9039/- from the principal amount. Whereas the interest of Rs.1150316/- becomes Rs.7700/- for one month and this amount is also not given to the complainant. Thus the complainant has suffered the loss of Rs.43423/- in this investment transaction with the respondent. The complainant requested the respondents several times to rectify the total loss and pay the interest as guaranteed by the employee of the respondents and also made representation on dated 16.10.2018 through registered post to deposit the amount of Rs.43423/- in his Saving Bank Account but to no effect. The act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to make the payment of Rs.43423/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party, who appeared and filed its written reply submitting therein that the complainant himself has invested the amount in the said scheme after fully understanding the terms and conditions and the amount was also given to the complainant under the terms and conditions of the scheme. Now the complainant cannot compare the same with the fixed deposit. It is denied that the complainant requested the employee of respondents to redeem the said amount in his saving account. In fact complainant himself applied online for redemption on 21.09.2018. It is denied that the complainant has suffered loss of Rs.43423/- in this investment transaction with the respondents. The employee of the respondents cannot invest any amount without the consent of customer. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of com plaint with costs.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and closed his evidence on dated 24.07.2019. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the opposite parties tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and closed her evidence on dated 29.11.2019. At the time of arguments, the opposite party has also placed on record some documents i.e. Annexure JN-A, and Annexure JN-B.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. We have perused all the documents placed on record by the complainant as well as the opposite parties. As per document Ex.C4, the complainant intimated the concerned bank for redemption of the funds on dated 27.08.2018. As per Ex.C2 the market value of the funds of the complainant was Rs.1150316/- on dated 27.08.2017 and the amount was redeemed on dated 21.09.2018 and on this date the total redemption amount was Rs.1141277/-. Meaning thereby, if the amount was to be redeemed on dated 27.08.2018, it was approximately Rs.1150000/-. The pleading of the complainant is that fund was redeemed belatedly by the respondents and in this way he suffered a loss of Rs.9039/- due to the negligent act of the respondent. The other contention of the complainant is that he has received less interest in this maturity fund in comparison with the FDR. Regarding this pleadings it is observed that it is the free will of the complainant that whether he deposited his amount in FDR or in the investment plan of opposite party. At the time of arguments, the respondent bank has placed on record some documents i.e. Annexure JN-A, and Annexure JN-B. Perusal of these documents shows that the complainant has invested an amount of Rs.10 lacs with the respondents on dated 18.08.2016 and Rs.1100000/- on dated 21.08.2017. Meaning thereby, the complainant was very well aware about the investment and return of his investment in funds or FDR. Hence the plea taken by the complainant that he has received less interest in comparison with FDR is irrelevant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that complainant is only entitled for the less market value received by him due to deficiency in service of the opposite parties due to late redemption of funds by the opposite parties. As such we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.9039/-(Rupees nine thousand and thirty nine only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of order i.e. 15.12.2020 till its realization to the complainant and also to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service as well as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
6. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.
7. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
15.12.2020.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
…………………………………..
Tripti Pannu, Member.
