- Consumer Complaint No. 180 of 2014
- Date of filing: 22.9.2014 Date of disposal: 19.9.2016
Complainant: Bandana Roy, W/o. Lakshmi Narayan Roy, residing at Baburbag Kalitala, PO: Rajbati, PS. & Dist: Burdwan, PIN – 713 103.
-V E R S U S-
Opposite Party: 1. Gold Mine Group of Companies Pvt. Ltd., 2/2A Dr. Suresh Sarkar Road, 2nd Floor, Kolkata – 700 014. Represented by Bablu Saha, S/o. Montulal Saha (Managing Director), Milan Park, Balagarh, Hooghly, PIN – 712 149.
2. The Branch Office of Gold Mine Group of Companies Pvt. Ltd., Vill. & PO: Budbud Bazar, Burdwan (near State Bank A.t.M.), District: Burdwan. Represented by Bablu Saha, S/o. Montulal Saha (Managing Director), Milan Park, Balagarh, Hooghly, PIN – 712 149.
Present: Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kumar Mandal.
Hon’ble Member: Smt. Silpi Majumder.
Hon’ble Member: Sri Pankaj Kumar Sinha.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate, Bikash Kumar Roy.
Appeared for the Opposite Party: Ld. Advocate, Dipak Chowdhury.
J U D G E M E N T
This complaint is filed by numerous consumers u/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 having same interest, alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs did not pay them the maturity amount in respect of the MIS and Fixed Deposit Accounts inspite of making several requests.
The brief fact of the case of the Complainants is that they being the ordinary common people wanted to make more money through their savings in a peaceful manner in order to maintain their daily life easily. For that purpose to make more savings with a good interest they deposited their entire savings in the projects of the OPs. Against those deposits the OPs have issued documents i.e. certificate, receipt etc which ensured that the Complainants will be entitled to get their amount back with interest as per the terms of the policy. After maturity of the policies when money was claimed by the Complainants, the OPs took time repeatedly to return the maturity amount, but failed to keep their promise on several times and then having no other alternative the Complainants have approached before this Ld. Forum because the action and attitude of the OPs have revealed that they are not willing to return back the maturity amount to the Complainants as per the terms and the conditions of the policy. Due to such unfair trade practice as adopted by the OPs the Complainants have lost their entire savings and due to which they are facing mental agony, pain, harassment along with financial stringency. By filing this complaint the Complainant have prayed for direction upon the OPs to return them a sum of Rs.11, 57,100=00 towards the maturity amount of several MIS and Fixed Deposits and to pay them a sum of Rs.8, 42, 900=00 as compensation due to harassment, mental pain and agony.
After admission hearing notices were issued upon the OPs through the approved method for issuance of notice as per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. As the unserved envelops have returned with the endorsement as ‘left’ and ‘left without address’, the Complainants were directed to take appropriate steps. After taking steps further notices were issued upon the OPS and the OP-2 & 3 have appeared by filing vokalatnama on 13.03.2015 and prayed time for filing written version. As the OP-2 & 3 did not file written version till 03.07.2015, the Ld. Forum was pleased to pass an order that the complaint will run ex parte against the OP-2 & 3. On 24.07.2015 as the notice in respect of the OP-1 had returned further with the endorsement as ‘left’, the Complainants were directed to take proper step. Thereafter the Complainant had prayed for changing the cause title of the complaint by deleting the names of the OPs and inserting the name of the OPs with changed addresses and accordingly the prayer was allowed by the Ld. Forum on 04.02.2016. After filing necessary requisites by the Complainants notices were issued upon the OPs. On 27.05.2016 the OPs have appeared by filing vokalatnama and prayed time for filing written version, but since then the OPs did not turn up to contest the complaint either by filing written version or by making oral submission. So the Ld. Forum was pleased to fix the complaint for hearing argument ex parte against the OPs. Accordingly we took up the hearing argument from the Ld. Counsel for the OPs and none was present on behalf of the OPs.
We have carefully perused the record, papers and documents filed by the Complainants and heard argument at length from the Ld. Counsel for the Complainants. It is seen by us that the case of the Complainants is that they deposited their hard earned money in different projects of the OPs with a view to get more money along with lucrative interest from those deposit. After making payment by the Complainants the OPs have issued policy certificates in favour of the depositors. According to the Complainants they deposited money in several MIS accounts and Fixed Deposit accounts. The allegation of the Complainants is that after maturity of those accounts though the Complainants on several occasions have approached before the OPs for getting the maturity amount along with interest in respect of their deposit, but the OPs did not take any step to return back them the maturity amount in respect of those accounts and not only that the OPs did not pay any heed to the requests made by the Complainants. According to the Complainants such attitude and inaction of the OPs can be termed as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and hence by filing this complaint the Complainants have prayed for return back their deposited money along with interest as per the terms of the policies and other reliefs.
It is stated by the Complainant namely Smt. Bandana Roy deposited money for the MIS account being no-101/05/228053 for Rs.2,65,000/- and the date of maturity of the said MIS account was on 26.06.2013 and it was scheduled that Smt. Roy will get Rs.2,70,300/- at the time of its maturity. We have noticed that on 26.06.2013 & 26.07.2013 the OPs have issued two A/c payee cheques in the name of Bandana Roy to the tune of Rs.2650/- each, but the two cheques was not deposited by the person concerned before the authority for encashment. For which purpose those cheques were issued by the OPs and what prevented Smt. Bandana Roy to deposit the same for encashment, the said averment is not mentioned in the petition of complaint. Moreover it is seen by us that though it is mentioned that Smt. Roy purchased the said MIS, but the documents does not reveal the same and in the document/policy no where the maturity date is mentioned. Therefore it is not at all clear to us as to whether the cause of action in respect of this policy of Smt. Bandana Roy has at all arisen or not.
It is mentioned that Sri Susanta Kumar Roy purchased two MIS and two Fixed Deposit from the OPs for Rs.1,00,000/-, Rs.50,000/-, Rs.15,000/- & Rs.5,000/- respectively and the maturity dates were 26.06.2013, 30.07.2013, 04.08.2013 and 01.012.2014 respectively. From the documents as filed by the Complainant Sri Susanta Kumar Roy that there is no mentioning on the documents that Sri Roy deposited money in MIS (2) & FD (2) and not only that no dates of maturity are mentioned in the said documents. Therefore whether any cause of action has at all arisen or not in respect of the MIS & FD accounts of Sri Roy, the picture is not clear. We have also noticed that several A/c payee cheques were issued by the OPs in favour of Sri Roy on different dates and for different amounts i.e. Rs.16,800/- dated 04.09.2013, Rs.500/- dated 30.05.2013, 30.06.2013, 30.07.2013, 30.08.2013, Rs.1000/- dated 26.06.2013 & 26.07.2013. For what purpose those cheques were issued in his favour, the petition of complaint does not contain the said averment. Admittedly Sri Roy did not deposit those cheques for encashment before the concerned authority and the reason is best known to him.
It is mentioned that Smt. Supriya Roy purchased three MIS from the OPs for Rs.1,35,000/-, Rs.50,000/- & Rs.1,00,000/- respectively and the maturity dates were 30.07.2013, 30.07.2013 & 28.08.2013 respectively. From the documents as filed by the Complainant Smt. Supriya Roy that there is no mentioning on the documents that Smt. Roy deposited money in MIS (3) and not only that no dates of maturity are mentioned in the said documents/certificates. Therefore whether any cause of action has at all arisen or not in respect of the MIS accounts of Smt. Roy, the picture is not clear to us. We have also noticed that several A/c payee cheques were issued by the OPs in favour of Smt. Roy on different dates and different amounts i.e. Rs.1,00,000/- dated 28.09.2013, Rs.1350/- dated 30.05.2013, 30.06.2013, 30.07.2013, Rs.1000/- dated 28.06.2013, 28.07.2013, 28.08.2013, 28.09.2013, Rs.500/- dated 30.08.2013, Rs.1000/- dated 28.09.2013, Rs.1000/- dated 28.09.2013, Rs.500/- dated 30.05.2013, 30.06.2013, 30.07.2013 & 30.08.2013. For what purpose those cheques were issued in his favour, the petition of complaint does not contain the said averment. Admittedly Smt. Roy did not deposit those cheques for encashment before the concerned authority and the reason is best known to her.
It is mentioned that Smt. Sangita Roy deposited money in three MIS accounts obtained from the OPs for Rs.1,50,000/-, Rs.1,50,000/-, Rs.1,00,000/- respectively and the maturity dates were 30.07.2013, 30.07.2013 and 28.08.2013 respectively. From the documents as filed by the Complainant Smt Sangita Roy that there is no mentioning on the documents that Smt. Roy deposited money in MIS (3) and not only that no dates of maturity are mentioned in the said documents. Therefore whether any cause of action has at all arisen or not in respect of the MIS accounts of Smt. Roy, the picture is not clear. We have also noticed that several A/c payee cheques were issued by the OPs in favour of Smt. Roy on different dates and for different amounts i.e. Rs.1,00,000/- dated 28.09.2013, Rs.1500/- dated 30.05.2013, 30.06.2013, 30.07.2013, 30.08.2013 in respect of the account no-125/05/230911, Rs.1500/- dated 30.05.2013, 30.06.2013 & 30.07.2013 & 30.08.2013 in respect of the account no-125/05/230909, Rs.1000/- dated 28.06.2013, 28.07.2013, 28.08.2013 & 28.09.2013. For what purpose those cheques were issued in her favour, the petition of complaint does not contain the said averment. Admittedly Smt. Roy did not deposit those cheques for encashment before the concerned authority and the reason is best known to her.
From the abovementioned observation it can be said that the Complainants have miserably failed to prove their case by adducing cogent documents that inspite of maturity of the accounts obtained from the OPs, the OPs did not bother to make payment of the maturity amount along with interest component as per the terms and conditions of the accounts/policies. Hence the complaint fails.
Going by the foregoing discussion hence, it is
O r d e r e d
that the complaint is dismissed ex parte against the OPs without any cost.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions of Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
(Asoke Kumar Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Pankaj Kumar Sinha) (Silpi Majumder)
Member Member
DCDRF, Burdwan DCDRF, Burdwan
