BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

                                                                   Complaint No.439 of 2018

                                                                   Date of Instt. 22.10.2018

                                                                   Date of Decision: 20.04.2021

1. Ranjit Kaur Age 46 years W/o Ajinder Singh, R/o H. No.1019, Sant Nagar, Ladowali Road, Jalandhar-144001. (FDR No.17866/Anx.C-1) Mobile Phone No.8264563276, 9815304632 

 

2. Lashman Singh Age 72 years son of Gurbax Singh, (Father-in-law of Ranjit Kaur) R/o 1019, Sant Nagar, Ladowali Road, Jalandhar (name added in FDR No.17866/Anx.C-1) Mobile Phone No.8264563276, 9815304632

3. Gian Singh Age 70 years S/o Sewa Singh (Father of Ranjit Kaur) R/o 32/3, Shaheed Baba Deep Singh Nagar, Jalandhar. (name added in FDR No.20043/Anx.C-2)

4. Mohinder Kaur Age 68 years W/o Gian Singh (Mother of Ranjit Kaur) R/o 32/3, Shaheed Baba Deep Singh Nagar, Jalandhar. (Name added in FDR No.20043/Anx. C-2)

5. Haleen Kaur D/o Ranjit Kaur, H. No.1019, Sant Nagar, Jalandhar (FDR No.20023/Anx.C-3)

6. Manpreet Singh Son of Ranjit Kaur (Minor through Mother Smt. Ranjit Kaur W/o Ajinder Singh) H. No.1019, Sant Nagar, Jalandhar. (name added in FDR No.20023/Anx. C-3)

7. Ajinder Singh Age 49 years Husband of Ranjit Kaur R/o H. No.1019, Sant Nagar, Ladowali Road, Jalandhar-144001. (Name added in FDR No.20209/Annexure C-4) Mobile Phone No.8264563276, 9815304632

..........Complainants

Versus

 

Harinder Leasing Limited, 1st Floor, Near Hotel Kings, G. T. Road, Jalandhar. Through its Managing Director/Director/Authorized Representative.

                                                                             ….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before:        Sh. Kuljit Singh              (President)

                    Smt. Jyotsna                      (Member)

Present:         Sh. Sumit Verma, Adv. Counsel for the Complainants.

                    OP exparte.

Order

                    Kuljit Singh (President)

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainants, wherein alleged that the complainant No.1 was allured tempted, induced and persuaded by OP for investment by deposit of money on interest to earn her livelihood to augment the meager income to make both ends meet. The complainant No.1 believing the sweet words and assurance given by OP, invested with OP a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on 03.01.2014 @ 11% PA for 36 months which matured on 03.01.2017 with maturity value of Rs.1,38,890/- vide FDR No.17866. That again on 16.10.2016 the complainant No.1 deposited with OP a sum of Rs.78,460/- @ 11% PA for 12 months which matured on 16.10.2017 with maturity value of Rs.87,538/-, vide FDR No.20043. That again on 29.12.2016 the complainant No.1 deposited with OP a sum of Rs.27,007/- @ 11% PA for 12 months which matured on 29.12.2017 with maturity value of Rs.30,132/-, vide FDR No.20023. That again on 26.08.2017 the complainant No.1 deposited with OP a sum of Rs.50,000/- @ 9% PA for 12 months which matured on 26.08.2018 with maturity value of Rs.54,690/-, vide FDR No.20209. That the complainant No.1 alongwith complainants No.2 to 7 visited the OP several times to get the matured amount of above said FDRs, but every time the OP put the complainant on one pretext or other and ignored to give the payment of above said matured FDRs. That on 12.09.2018 the complainant sent a registered legal notice to OP through her advocate requesting to give the payment of above said matured FDRs, but all in vain and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainants may be accepted and OP be directed to pay the amount of FDRs Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 Rs.3,11,250/- and further OP be directed to give interest @ 11% per annum till realization and further OP be directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.5500/- and compensation for mental tension and harassment to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/-.

2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, but despite service OP failed to appear and ultimately, OP was proceeded against exparte.

3. In order to prove her case, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence two affidavits Ex.CA and Ex.CB alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 and closed the exparte evidence.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the case file very minutely.

5. From the perusal of the pleadings of the complainants, it is clear that complainant No.1 had deposited a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, vide FDR No.17866 on 03.01.2014 with maturity value of Rs.1,38,890 on 03.01.2017. Again complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.78,460/-, vide FDR No.20043 on 16.10.2016 with maturity value of Rs.87,538/- on 16.10.2017. Then again the complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.27,007/-, vide FDR No.20023 on 29.12.2016 with maturity value of Rs.30,132/- on 29.12.2017 and again complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/-, vide FDR No.20209 on 26.08.2017 with maturity value of Rs.54,690/- on 26.08.2018, which is evident from Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4. Now question remains whether the complainants virtually ever approached to the OP for making the payment of said matured FDRs, regarding that a legal notice served by the complainant on 12.09.2018 and in response to the legal notice, the OP did not bother to pay the matured amount. If the OP ready to make the payment, then why the OP did not give offer to complainants to get the payment of the matured FDRs.

6. Apart from that the photostat copy of the FDRs available on the file Ex.C-1 having No.17866 dated 03.01.2014 and the maturity values is Rs.1,38,890/- and maturity date 03.01.2017,  Ex.C-2 having  No.20043 dated 16.10.2016 and its maturity value is Rs.87,538/- on 16.10.2017. Ex.C-3 having No.20023 dated 29.12.2016 and its maturity value is Rs.30,132/- on 29.12.2017. Ex.C-4 having No.20209 dated 26.08.2017 and its maturity value is Rs.50,000/- on 26.08.2018. There is not iota of documents available on the file, served by the OP to the complainants that their FDRs are matured and get the payment, so, it means the OP also did not call upon the complainants to get the payment of matured FDRs. So, under these circumstances and unrebutted evidence, we find that the OP himself is negligent for not paying the maturity amount despite repeated request of the complainants, which is tantamount to deficiency in service and accordingly, we reached to the conclusion that the complainants are entitled for the relief claimed. 

7. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainants is partly accepted and OP is directed to reimburse the maturity amount of both the FDRs i.e. in total Rs.3,11,250/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of maturity, till realization and further OP is directed to pay compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work and spread of Covid-19. 

8.               Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

Announced in open Commission

 

20th of April 2021

 

 

 

 

Kuljit Singh

(President)

 

 

 

Jyotsna

(Member)