Date of Filing             :    16 June. 2022.

Date of Order            :    16 October, 2023.

Mr.  Dhiraj Kumar Dey,  Hon’ble Member.

            This case arises when Smt. Ira Debnath, hereinafter called the Complainant , filed a complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019  (the Act), against (1) the Branch Manager, Sealdah Branch, Sahara India Pariwar and (2) M/s. Sahara Credit Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Lucknow – 226 204, hereinafter called the Opposite Parties or OPs, alleging deficiency in service occurred from the part of the OPs arising out of non-payment of maturity amount after the date of maturity.

            The material facts arising out of the complaint petition and the annexed documents attached with it are that the complainant purchased a fixed deposit certificate from the OPs being FD Certificate No. FD-478010459978 on 17.03.2010 and the date of maturity was 17.03.2020.  The maturity amount was fixed as Rs.31,060/- .  complainant’s allegation is that after the date of maturity she met several times with the OP-1 to get the maturity amount but every time she failed to receive the maturity amount.  After repeated failure she sent a letter to the OP-1 on 07/02/2022 requesting to release the maturity amount but she got no result.  She then sent a legal notice to the OP-1 through her lawyer on 20/04/2022 which also brought no hopeful result.  Finding no other alternative way to resolve her grave concern she filed this instant complaint praying to direct both the OPs: (i) to pay the maturity amount of Rs.31,060/- to the complainant,  (ii) to  pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the deficiency in service and (iii) to pay Rs.50,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant.

             Complainant filed copies of (i) her AADHAAR Card, (ii) receipt copy bearing receipt no. 161710323374, dated 17/03/2010, and Certificate bearing No. 478010459978, dated 17/03/2010, both issued though Sealdah Branch office, (iii) letter dated 07/02/2022 issued by her and (iv) letter dated 20/04/2022 issued through her lawyer as annexure to the complaint petition.  

            Notices were served upon the OPs, after admission, to appear and contest the case by filing their written version.  None of the OPs appeared nor had they filed their written versions for which the case proceeded ex parte. Then the complainant filed Evidence on Affidavit. Later, argument was heard in full and the complainant filed her Brief Notes on Argument.  We are now in a position to deliver the Final Order/Judgment.  We have to decide whether any deficiency in service has been occurred from the part of the OPs for which the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for.

DECISION WITH REASONS

1.        The complainant stated at the begining in her complaint petition that:

            1.   “ …. purchased a fixed deposit certificate from the O.P. No. 1 and O. P. No. 2 being the Fixed Deposit Certificate No. FD-478010459978 and Fixed Deposit           Receipt No. 161710323374 respectively which FD Certificate issued on 17.03.2010         and matured on 17.03.2020 respectively.”    (emphasis provided)

            But when go through the copy of receipt and the certificate annexed with the complaint we find that  a receipt has been issued on 17/03/2010 by the Sealdah branch, Code No. 1617, of SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LIMITED.  The receipt bearing no. 161710323374 states that an amount of Rs.10,000/- is received from Smt. Ira Debnath on 17/03/2010.  The Certificate bearing no. 478010459978 states that Smt. Ira Debnath “is the Holder of 10 (ten only) optionally fully convertible paid up “ABODE BOND” of Rupees One thousand each in the above named Company, subject to the terms and conditions on Application Form and Provisions of the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the Company.” (emphasis provided).  This Certificate has been issued by the SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LIMITED, having its Command & Regd. Office at Sahara India Bhawan,  1, Kapoorthala Complex, Lucknow – 226 024.  In this certificate the Redemption Value is written as Rs.31,060/- and the Redemption Date is written as 17/03/2020.

2.        The above stated writings of the Receipt and the Certificate state that the complainant invested in the “ABODE BOND” of M/s. SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LIMITED.  The complainant failed to apprehend the name of the OP company, nor did she realise that she was investing in a BOND.  She had not purchased an FD though she has stated in her complaint that she purchased an FD of Rs.10,000/- on 17/03/2010. 

3.       The complainant stated the name of the company of OP-1 as Sahara India Pariwar and the name of the OP-2 has been written as Sahara India Credit Co-operative Society Ltd.  But we have not found existence of the OP-2 company in the annexed documents.

4.        As the complainant has not filed any other documents, except the receipt and the certificate, we cannot ascertain the meaning and nature of the Adobe Bond.  The terms and conditions had been written in the Application Form which the complainant had not annexed herein. In general, in the money market, buying a bond means giving the issuer a loan for a set duration; the issuer pays a predetermined interest rate at set intervals until the bond matures. There are various types of Bonds in the money market such as: Fixed-rate bonds, Floating-rate bonds, Perpetual bonds, etc.  It’s a general rule that money market is being controlled by the Reserve Bank of India.

5.        Considering all the above-noted discussions we are of the view that the complainant has not provided us the actual name of the OP company.  She has failed to state that she has invested in a Bond, she had not purchased an FD.  There were no maturity amount, rather there were a Redemption Value stated in the certificate as Rs.31,060/-.

            We cannot direct a company who are not involved in this case.  Hence, we think that the instant case is liable to be dismissed due to non-joinder of appropriate Opposite Party and miss-joinder unnecessary Opposite Party coupled with miss-representation of the facts.  However, the complainant will have the liberty to file her complaint in a proper form with a proper Cause Title.

            Hence,  it is

ORDERED

            that the Complaint Case No. CC/155/2022  be and the same is dismissed ex parte against the Opposite Parties for devoid of any merit and with no cost.

            Let a copy of this order be issued to both the parties free of cost. 

Dictated and corrected by me

            Member.