In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.   363 / 2011.

1)                   Priya Sankar Bose,

87A/1, Bosepukur Road, Kolkata-700042.                                               ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   India Infoline Ltd. (IIFL) ZO, Kolkata,

1, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-700071.                                                 ---------- Opposite Party

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, PRESIDENT.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri ,MEMBER.

                        Smt. Sharmi Basu ,MEMBER.

Order No.    8    Dated  17/04/2012.

            The petition of the complaint has been filed by the complainant Priya Sankar Bose against the o.p. India Infoline Ltd. (IIFL). The case of the complainant in short is that on 18.8.11 complainant was asked over phone to deposit Rs.30,000/- when debit balance of Rs.77,000/- and on the very next date representative of o.p. from Zonal Office, Kolkata and collected the cheque from the residence of the complainant and complainant handed over the cheque to Zonal Officer D.P. Deptt. at noon and the cheque was supposed to be credited by next 3 days i.e. on 24.8.11 but no intimation was communicated to the complainant in the matter of encashment of the aforesaid cheque. So, the credit of Rs. 30,000/- effected was treated as although 22% interest was in the offer. It is the case of the complainant that such non credit of the said amount was owing to the negligence of the staff and lack of coordination between the officers Kolkata and Mumbai of o.p. who were working hard recklessly to sell the share of Rs.1,06,043.25 against the dues of Rs.69,261.87. It is the further case of the complainant that due to lack of coordination of two officers of Kolkata and Mumbai, R.N. Deptt. the share of complainant of Rs.1,06,043.25 against the dues of Rs.69,261.87 and this debit was allowed as a commercial facility for which interest @ 22% charged as per practice and complainant has opined such coercive sale amounts to misuse of POA.

            O.p. did not enter into the case by filing w/v and accordingly, the matter was heard ex parte.

Decision with reasons:

            We have gone through the pleadings of the complainant, evidence and documents in particular and to our opinion the evidence of complainant has remained unchallenged piece of testimony since o.p. had not come forward to rebut the same. Therefore, we hold that the complainant is entitled to relief for deficiency of service being a service provider on behalf of o.p. to its consumer / complainant.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the petition of complaint is allowed ex parte against the o.p. with cost in part. O.p. is directed to pay the amount @ 22% p.a. interest over Rs.30,000/- from 29.8.11 till the date of realization and is directed to pay compensation of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only and litigation cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.

   _____Sd-_____                     _____Sd-______             _______Sd-_______

     MEMBER                            MEMBER                        PRESIDENT