Order dictated by:

Sh.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member.

1.       Present complaint has been filed by Mrs.Kanwaljit Kaur under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that the complainant alongwith her husband is the holder of FDR issued by Opposite Party for the principal amount of Rs.4,38,756.21 paisa as reinvestment deposit under senior citizen plan and  is to be renewed automatically. Hence the complainant is a consumer as provided under the Act and is competent to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum. The said FDR was never got encashed by the complainant nor her husband. The earlier date of maturity as endorsed on the instrument was 1.10.2010 and since the same was under ‘Reinvestment Deposit Scheme’ of the Opposite Party, the same was to get reinvested automatically till the instructions are to be given by the account holder either to get the same encashed prematurely or get the status of the same changed. The complainant so far neither got the said instrument encashed or get the status changed from the ‘reinvestment plan’. The complainant wanted to get the said instrument encashed, thus she visited the Opposite Party bank with the original instrument for the said purpose but the encashment was refused by the Opposite Party without any  justified reasons. The aforesaid acts of the Opposite Party in refusing to encash the said FDR without any reason is an act of  deficiency in services, mal practice, unfair trade practice and has caused lot of mental agony, harassment, inconvenience besides financial loss to the complainant for which the Opposite Party is liable to pay the compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following  reliefs:-

a)       Opposite Party be directed to pay the amount of Rs.4,38,756.21 paisa alongwith interest accrued thereon till date.

b)      Opposite Party be directed to pay the compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant.

c)       Opposite Party be directed to pay the adequate costs of the litigation.

d)      Any other consequential relief to which the complainant is entitled to  under the law, equity, justice and fairplay be also awarded.

Hence this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, Sh.Amritpal Singh, Assistant Manager appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party, but despite availing the sufficient opportunities, the written version by Opposite Party not filed despite availing more than 45 days, hence Opposite Party has forfeited its right to file the written version.  

3.       In her bid  to prove the case, complainant tendered  her duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1, copy of FDR Ex.C2 and  closed the  evidence.

4.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant and have carefully gone through the evidence on record.

5.       From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that complainant alongwith her husband is the holder of FDR issued by Opposite Party for the principal amount of Rs.4,38,756.21 paisa as reinvestment deposit under senior citizen plan and  is to be renewed automatically, copy of the FDR accounts for Ex.C2. It was the case of the complainant that said FDR was never got encashed by the complainant nor her husband. The earlier date of maturity as endorsed on the instrument was 1.10.2010 and since the same was under ‘Reinvestment Deposit Scheme’ of the Opposite Party, the same was to get reinvested automatically till the instructions are to be given by the account holder either to get the same encashed prematurely or get the status of the same changed. The complainant so far neither got the said instrument encashed or get the status changed from the ‘reinvestment plan’. The complainant wanted to get the said instrument encashed, thus she visited the Opposite Party bank with the original instrument for the said purpose but the encashment was refused by the Opposite Party without any  justified reasons. The averment made by the complainant vide her duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1 and evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted on record as  Opposite Party despite due service, did not opt to contest the proceedings by filing written version. Not only this, though Sh.Amritpal Singh, Assistant Manager appeared on behalf of Opposite Party, but despite availing the sufficient opportunities, the written version on behalf of  Opposite Party not filed despite availing more than 45 days, hence Opposite Party has forfeited its right to file the written version.   In this way, the Opposite Party has impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Party  has no defence to offer or defend the complaint. The complainant has sought for directions from the Opposite Party  to pay the amount of Rs.4,38,756.21 paisa alongwith interest accrued thereon till date besides compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant and also to pay adequate costs of the litigation.

6.       Resultantly we allow the complaint with costs and the opposite party is directed to pay the maturity amount of this FDR including interest accrued thereon at the rate applicable during this period till date of payment. But however, the claim for compensation and litigation expenses  to the tune of Rs.50,000/-  is concerned, the same appears to be exorbitant and excessive. The rationale behind grant of compensation has been to compensate a party of the loss occasioned by it. It is none of the intention of the legislature while legislating the Consumer Protection Act to enrich a particular party at the cost of the other. The compensation has to be awarded in commensuration with the loss occasioned to the complainant. In our considered view, ends of justice would  be fully met if the complainant is awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.2000/- and we award the same accordingly. Besides this, Opposite Party is granted one month time to comply with the order, failing which  the complainant would have a right to get this order enforced through the indulgence of this Forum.  The complaint stands allowed accordingly. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Announced in Open Forum