West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/60/2021

Sri Goutam Acharya - Complainant(s)

Versus

HICCSL - Opp.Party(s)

Subrata Mukhopadhay,CAB

16 Mar 2023

ORDER

Shri Sudip Majumder-President-in-Charge.

 The complainant files this case U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The fact of the case in brief is that the complaionant/petitioner, Sri Goutam Acharya invested in the OP Company through one certificate being No. 555000867220 amounting of Rs. 35,490/- dated 30/09/2016, having maturity value Rs. 50,836/- Maturity date 30/03/2019.

 That after maturity, the complainant several times requested to both the OPs but they did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant and thereafter the complainant submitted application for getting his legitimate amount.

 That the cause of action arose and from 30/03/2019 and lastly on 03/01/2020 and thereafter each and every day when the complainant started to fact problem and repeatedly requested to the Op but to no effect.

 That the complainant finding no other alternative has compelled to file the case for proper relief and justice.

 Therefore, complaint prayed before this Commission for the following relief/reliefs:-

1) To pass an order directing the O.P. to give the maturity amount of Rs. 50,836/- along with interest till realization of the same to the complainant.

2) To pass an order directing the O.P. to pay Rs 1,00,000/- (One Lakh) for physical and mental harassment caused by the O.P.

3) Any other relief/reliefs as the Court think fit and proper.

It appears from case record that none appears from OPs before this District Commission after

 

receiving the notice. OPs have not taken any steps. No written version has yet been filed by the OPs. As a result of that vide order Nos. 10 and 13 dated 12/04/2022 and 08/07/2022 this Commission stated for running of the instant case exparte against the OP Nos. 1 and 2 respectively.

 Complainant’s side submitted evidence-in-chief and written notes on argument (W/N/A). Some documents have also been filed by the complainant himself and compare with original documents. Thereafter, Ld. Advocate for the complainant made oral argument in support of his case.

 Points for determination/Issues

1) Whether the complainant is a consumer as per definition of the term ‘Consumer’ of the C.P Act. ?

2) Whether this Commission has jurisdiction to try this case?

3) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Op?

4) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any other relief or reliefs as prayed for?

 Decision with reasons

Point No. 1:

 Evidently the complainant/ Sri Goutam Acharya invested in the OP Company through one certificate being No. 555000867220 amounting of Rs. 35,490/- dated 30/09/2016, having maturity value Rs. 50,836/- Maturity date 30/03/2019 and as such the complainant is a Consumer U/S 2(7) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the OP is the service provider of the complainant.

Point No. 2:

 That the complainant invested the amount and its maturity date on 30/03/2019, that the cause of action arose and from 30/03/2019 and lastly on 03/01/2020 and the case has been filed on 10/08/2021, as the last correspondence between the parties dated 03/01/2020 and as such it can be said that the complainant has been filed this case within the statutory period of the C.P. Act, and as such the instant complaint is not barred U/S 69(1) of the C.P. Act, 2019.

 Pecuniary Jurisdiction of this District Commission as per Notification No. G.S.R. 892(E). dated 20th December, 2022 by Consumer Affairs Department, Govt. of India, New Delhi i.e. Rs. 50 lakh.

 The OP has a Branch Office which is opposite to Sainthia Municipality P.O. and P.S. Sainthia, Dist. Birbhum, Pin No. 731234 which is under the Territorial Jurisdiction of this District Commission as per Sec. 34(2) of C.P. Act, 2019.

Hence, this Commission has Pecuniary Jurisdiction as well as Territorial Jurisdiction.

Point No. 3:

 It appears to us from the documentary evidence of the complainant that after maturity, the complainant several times requested to the Sainthia Branch Office of the OP but they did not pay any

heed to the request of the complainant and thereafter the complainant submitted application for getting his legitimate amount.

      

That the OP with the help of its men and agents is depriving its customers in various ways which is not tenable in law.

 Considering over all matter into consideration and materials on records and we are constrained to hold that the complainant has been able to prove his case of deficiency in service by the OP as they did not refunded maturity amount Rs. 50,836/- to the complainant in time.

Point No. 4:

 As in this case, it is proved that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

 Hence, the complainant is entitled to get relief or compensation as prayed for.

 Thus, all the points are decided in favour of the complainant.

 Complainant is sufficiently stamped and proved his case beyond all reasonable doubt.

• In Chengalrayan Cooperative Sugar Mills Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (2000) 10 SCC 213 it was held that “Interest ought to have been awarded from the date on which the claim was filed before the Forum.”

• In Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. Vs. G. Harishchandra Reddy & Anr. (2007) 2 SCC 720 it was held that “Only 9% interest be awarded on refund matter.”

 In the instant case as per view of the Hon’ble Apex Court in several cases the interest will be given @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of this case.

Hence, it is,

 O R D E R E D,

       that the instant C.F. Case No. 60/2021 be and same is allowed exparte against the O.P. with cost.

The OP is directed to pay the maturity amount of certificate amounting of Rs. 50,836/- (Fifty thousand eight hundred thirty six only) to the complainant/petitioner along with interest thereon @ 9% per annum calculating on and from 10/08/2021 (i.e. from the date of filing of this case) to till realization. OP is also directed to pay Rs. 2000/- (Two thousand only) to the complainant/petitioner as against mental agony and harassment to the complainant.

The entire decree will be complied by the O.P. within 45 (Forty five) days from this date of order, in default the complainant is at liberty to put this order in execution in accordance with law.

The instant case is thus disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be given/handed over to the parties to this case free of cost.