Per Justice R. C. Jain, Presiding Member (Oral) The complainant, who was erstwhile Surpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Wazirabad, Gurgaon has filed the present complaint against the opposite party, alleging deficiency in service, with the prayer for a direction to the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 3,85,00,000/- (three crores eighty five lakhs only) alongwith interest @24% per annum from the date of the complaint till realization, as compensation and the amount be paid to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Gurgaon, Haryana. 2. The consumer dispute sought to be raised in this complaint is in regard to Fixed Deposit of Rs. 3 crores, which the complainant made with the opposite party-Bank sometime in April, 2008 for a period of three years carrying interest @ 9% and the total amount on the date of maturity was to be Rs.3,85,00,000/-. However, the said Gram -3- Panchayat of village Wazirabad was dissolved under a notification of the State Government and was merged in the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon. Though the FDR was taken in his individual/personal capacity but the complainant had assigned the same to the Gram Panchayat, Village Wazirabad, who after the dissolution of the Gram Panchayat assigned the said FDR in favour of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon. It is alleged that during the intervening period, the complainant was misled by the opposite party and the amount was invested in a different scheme i.e. Kotak Life Insurance, which had a stipulation that in case of pre-mature termination of the said scheme, the deposited amount would be reduced to a sum of Rs.2,65,89,975.40. 3. The grievance of the complainant is that he being a semi literate person could not comprehend the implication of said scheme and, therefore was misled in the process, which is adverse to the interest of the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon. A letter dated 27.09.2011 (at page 21-22 of the paper book) issued by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon to the Branch Manager, M/s Kotak Mahindra, Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd., HB -4- Twin Towers, 5th Floor Netaji Subhash Place, Wazirpur, District Centre Pitampura, Delhi as well as the Branch Manager, M/s Kotak Mahindra, Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd., Sector 14, Gurgaon, which has been filed on record reads as under:- “From Commissioner Municipal Corporation Gurgaon To The Branch Manager M/s Kotak Mahindra, Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd. HB Twin Towers, 5th Floor Netaji Subhash Place, Wazirpur, Distt. Centre Pitampura, Delhi-34 and The Branch Manager M/s Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurance Ltd. Sector 14, Gurgaon No. CAO/MCG/2011/3451-3452 Dated 27/09/2011 Sub. Regarding policy No. 01001491 client ID 52887904. Reference your letter dated 10.08.2011 (copy enclosed) on the subject cited above. -5- It is brought to your notice that erstwhile Gram Panchayat Wazirabad (Gurgaon) resolved to invest with Rs. 3cr. out of Gram Panchayat Fund in FDR with Kotak Mahindra Bank vide its resolution No. 5 dated 08.04.2008 (copy enclosed). But insurance policy bond for Rs.3 cr. covering life of Sh. Sube Singh the then Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat was issued by you. The funds of Gram Panchayat were public money and could not be used for purchase of personal Life Insurance Policy and also against the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat. This was a case of miss-utilisation Public money in which your bank is also involved. Moreover, the maturity value of the said policy insurance is linked with value of units in Top Up Accounts due to which the principle amount of Rs. 3 cr. have decreased and shown Rs.2,65,89,975.40 as on 10.08.2011. As such the amount deposited is getting lost due to purchase of Personal Life Insurance Policy instead of investing the amount in fixed deposit for 3 year with your bank earning interest prevailing at that time as resolved by the erstwhile Gram Panchayat. In view of above, it is requested that the amount of Rs. 3 cr. Deposited by erstwhile Gram Panchayat may be converted into investment for 3 year fixed deposit at the interest prevailing at that time by cancelling the Life Insurance Policy Bond No. 01001491. Chief Accounts Officer For Commissioner Municipal Corporation Gurgaon Endst. No. CAO/MCG/2011/3453 Dated 27/9/2011 A copy of above is forwarded to the Managing Director Godrej Coliseum, 8th Floor, Lokmanya Pan Bazar, Behind Everard Nagar, Sion Trombay Road, Sion (E) Mumbai-400022 for information and necessary action. Chief Accounts Officer For Commissioner Municipal Corporation Gurgaon” -6- This would show that the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon has already taken up the matter with the opposite party-Bank for making necessary corrections/rectifications in regard to the said Fixed Deposit made by the complainant in his capacity as erstwhile Surpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Wazirabad, Gurgaon. 4. We have heard Mr. Rao Ranjit, learned counsel representing the complainant on the question of maintainability of the complaint in the present forum, in particular, about the locus-standi of the complainant to file the present complaint. According to the learned counsel, the complainant has locus to file the present complaint. After considering all the averments and allegation and assuming the same to be correct at this stage for the purpose of the adjudication of the question, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant has no locus-standi to file the present complaint for the alleged grievance and the relief. We say so because as per the own showing of the complainant, he had assigned the FDR in question in favour of the Gram Panchayat, Wazirabad, who after its dissolution by the notification of the State Government had further assigned the same in -7- favour of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon. Not only that, the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon being the successor-in-interest has already taken up the matter with the authorities of the opposite parties for doing the needful. We have not been apprised if the grievance of the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon as projected in his letter dated 27.09.2011 has or has not been redressed so far. In our view, having regard to the above factual and legal position, it is the Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon which alone has the locus to file the complaint for the redressal of the grievance raised in the present complaint and not the complainant in his individual capacity or who has been divested of the official position due to dissolution of Gram Panchayat. In any case, the complainant in the prayer clause has himself prayed that the amount which is to be awarded by this Commission may be paid to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon, Haryana. That would show that the complainant has no interest in the matter. In our view, it is a sheer attempt on the part of the complainant to abuse the jurisdiction of this Commission. -8- For the above reasons, we dismiss this complaint as not maintainable with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in the Legal Aid Account of this Commission within a period of two weeks from today, failing which, recovery certificate shall be issued to the Collector, District Gurgaon for realization of the said amount from the complainant. |
