Order dictated by:
Smt.Vinod Bala, Presiding Member
1. The complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that he deposited Rs.6 lacs under the CUM.36 Scheme in the form of FDR bearing No.00392482 for a period of 3 years i.e. from 14.01.2013 to 14.01.2016 with maturity value of Rs.8,71,320/- and the net amount payable after tax deduction was Rs.8,44,188/-, copy of the FDR is attached herewith. It is averred that on the maturity date i.e. 14.01.2016 the Opposite Parties were duty bound to pay the maturity amount of Rs.8,44,188/- after deducting tax, but the Opposite Parties failed to pay the maturity value on 14.1.2016, through the Opposite Parties issued cheque bearing No.763173 dated 6.7.2017 for a sum of Rs.8,44,188/- after deducting tax, but the Opposite Parties have withheld the maturity value wrongly and illegally for a period of 1½ years after the date of maturity and not paid any interest for the said period i.e. w.e.f. 14.1.2016 to 6.7.2017. Thereafter, the Complainant requested the Opposite Parties number of times to admit the rightful claim of the Complainant and to pay the interest amount on the delayed period, but all in vain. It is further submitted that the Complainant also sent a legal notice dated 9.9.2017 vide registered post on 11.9.2017 to the Opposite Parties, but the Opposite Parties did not give any reply to that notice. It is further submitted that as the payment of the said FDR was made to the agent of Opposite Parties through cheque at District Moga, hence this Forum has got jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint. Due to the aforesaid acts and conduct and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant has suffered mental tension, harassment as well as financial loss. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
- To direct the Opposite Parties to pay the interest of Rs.1,58,920/- i.e. @ 12% per annum on account of FDR withheld by the Opposite Parties wrong and illegally after the maturity date alongwith future interest.
- Further to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of mental tension, harassment and deficiency in service and Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses.
- Any other relief may kindly be granted as this Forum may deem fit and proper.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, inspite of due service, none put in appearance on behalf of the Opposite Parties and as such, the Opposite Parties were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 20.03.2018 of this Forum.
3. In his bid to prove the case, complainant tendered his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1 in support of the allegations made in the complaint and also produced copy of FDR Ex.C2, copy of receipt Ex.C3, copy of cheque Ex.C4, copy of bank account Ex.C5, copy of legal notice served upon Opposite Parties Ex.C6, copy of postal receipt Ex.C7, copy of power of attorney Ex.C8 and closed the exparte 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 the Complainant deposited Rs.6 lacs under the CUM.36 Scheme in the form of FDR bearing No.00392482 for a period of 3 years i.e. from 14.01.2013 to 14.01.2016 with maturity value of Rs.8,71,320/- and the net amount payable after tax deduction was Rs.8,44,188/-, copy of the FDR accounts for Ex.C2. It is the case of the Complainant that on the maturity date i.e. 14.01.2016 the Opposite Parties were duty bound to pay the maturity amount of Rs.8,44,188/- after deducting tax, but the Opposite Parties failed to pay the maturity value on 14.1.2016, through the Opposite Parties issued cheque bearing No.763173 dated 6.7.2017 for a sum of Rs.8,44,188/- after deducting tax, copy of the cheque in question accounts for Ex.C4, but the Opposite Parties have withheld the maturity value wrongly and illegally for a period of 1½ years after the date of maturity and not paid any interest for the said period i.e. w.e.f. 14.1.2016 to 6.7.2017. Thereafter, the Complainant requested the Opposite Parties number of times to admit the rightful claim of the Complainant and to pay the interest amount on the delayed period, but all in vain. It is further submitted that the Complainant also sent a legal notice dated 9.9.2017 vide registered post on 11.9.2017 to the Opposite Parties, but the Opposite Parties did not give any reply to that notice, copy of the legal notice accounts for Ex.C6 whereas the copy of the postal receipt accounts for Ex.C7. Due to the aforesaid acts and conduct and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant has sought for compensation for suffering mental tension, harassment as well as financial loss. The evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted on record as the Opposite Parties, despite due service, did not opt to appear and contest the proceedings. In this way, the Opposite Parties have impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Parties have no defence to offer or defend the complaint. The complainant has sought for direction to the Opposite Parties to pay the interest of Rs.1,58,920/- i.e. @ 12% per annum on account of FDR withheld by the Opposite Parties wrong and illegally after the maturity date alongwith future interest, besides this the Complainant also sought Rs.50,000/- on account of mental tension, harassment and deficiency in service and Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses.
6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in our considered view, the Opposite Parties are liable to pay reasonable rate of interest on the maturity amount, which we assess @ 9% per annum w.e.f. the maturity date i.e.14.01.2016 till its actual realization. Besides this, the complainant is also granted litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.2000/-. As stated above, the Complainant has prayed for compensation for causing him mental tension and harassment, but both compensation and interest can not be granted simultaneously for the same cause of action as the complainant has already been granted interest on the delayed period as mentioned above. In this regard, it has been held by Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in case Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. B.Ramareddy, II(2006) CPJ 339 (NC) that where the interest on the amount is allowed, the awarding of compensation separately not justified. So, in view of the supra ruling of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi, we disallow the prayer of the complainant for grant of compensation. Opposite Parties are granted one month time to comply with the order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Forum. The complaint stands allowed exparte accordingly. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
