Date of Filing: 18-02-2014 Date of Final Order: 28-11-2014
Complainant Smt. Shikharani Dutta, W/O Sri Subal Ch. Dutta, has filed the present case u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 as consumer, praying for issuing a direction upon the Opposite Parties to pay the Complainant (1) Rs.38,420/- as maturity amount, (2) Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental pain, agony & unnecessary harassment, (3) Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost i.e. Rs.63,420/- in total, besides other relief(s) as the Forum deem fit, as per law & equity.
The fact of the case in gist as can be gathered from the record is that the Complainant invested Rs.30,000/- under Fixed Deposit scheme for two years to the office of the O.P. No.1 i.e. Pratigya Housing Finance & Construction Company Ltd., Cooch Behar Branch through their agent, Narayan Barman i.e. O.P. No.2 on 25-10-2011 against which the Money Receipt was issued by the Opposite Party Company and also issued a Certificate vide No.COB/00183 for booking plot. The O.Ps assured to the complainant that they will give either 3400 Sq. ft. plot, vide Registration No.039167886 dated 20-10-2012 or Rs.38, 420/- as maturity amount on 20-10-2013.
The prime allegation of the Complainants is that after maturity period the complainant went to the office of the O.P. No.1 and submitted the Certificate which was issued by the O.P Company, but the O.P. No.1 did not take any necessary steps. Thereafter, the complainant made contact with the O.P. No.1 & 2 on several times, but all were in vain. Thus, the complainant suffered from mental pain, agony and unnecessary harassment and finding no other alternative, complainant has filed the present case seeking redress intending to get her deposited amount with compensation and cost.
The instant complaint has been filed for Rs.63,420/- along with Original Money Receipt, Xerox copies of relevant documents and I.P.O. of Rs.110/- deposited and the complaint was registered as DF-11/2014.
In the case in hand after receiving notice from this Forum the Opposite Parties appeared through their respective agents but after that the O.P No. 1 neither appeared nor filed any W/V for contesting the case. The O.P. No. 2 has filed W/ V along with affidavit but after that he failed to attend before this Forum as such this case proceeded with ex-parte against the Opposite Parties.
The following moot points are necessarily come up for consideration to reach a just decision.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the Complainant is a Consumer as per Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?
- Have the Opposite Parties any deficiency in service as alleged by the Complainant and are the opposite parties liable in any way to compensate the Complainant?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief/reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully and also perused entire Xeroxed/original documents in the record and heard argument of the complainant.
Point No. 1.
The Complainant Smt. Sikharani Dutta in view to savings, invested a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the O.P. No. 1 through the O.P. No. 2 in their Cooch Behar Office. The Opposite Party Company also issued money receipt against that investment. Thus, in view of the status of the Complainant and the relationship with the O.Ps so established from the documents; we are of the clear opinion that the Complainant is the Consumer as per provision of section laid down in C.P. Act, 1986.
Point No. 2.
The Complainant has filed this case with claim of Rs.63,420/- i.e. within Rs.20,00,000/- and the office/residence of the Opposite Parties is situated in this district also cause of action arose within this district. Hence, this Forum has pecuniary as well a territorial jurisdiction to try this case.
Point No. 3 & 4.
It is the case of the complainant that he deposited Rs.30,000/- to the O.P Company but after maturity he did not get any amount from the O.P.
The Complainant has filed Evidence on affidavit with original document. By giving a close look on the materials made available in the record it appears that the Complainant deposited Rs.30,000/-on 25.10.2011 to the Opposite Party Company i. e. Pratigya Housing Finance & Construction Company Ltd but there appears no date of maturity but the maturity amount is Rs 33,900/-. The O.P Company issued Money receipt with seal and signature of the official of the Opposite Party Company. Thus, it is clearly established beyond any manner of doubt that the O.P Company/the M.D of the said Company received Rs. 30,000/- from the Complainant.
It is pertinent to mention that the documents as filed by the complainant it is not transparent that the Opposite Party No. 1, 2 or other Opposite Parties are involved in the said business in any way. However, Sri Dipten Banerjee S/O Late Jitendra Banerjee appeared before this Forum through Ld. Advocate Kumar Dhiraj Narayan as M.D i.e. O.P.No.1 but failed to file W/V and thereafter did not come forward before this Forum to contest the case or to challenge any allurement of the complaint. The O.P. No. 2 appeared through ld. Agent and by filing W/V contested the case but thereafter did not come forward for argument. By filing W/V the O.P. No.2 admitted the fact of deposit of 30,000/- by the Complainant to the Opposite Party No. 1 through this O.P. It is the case of the O.P. No. 2 that the Complainant already received the maturity amount of Rs. 30,000/- and that was her first time policy. The Complainant obtained 2nd policy of Rs. 34,000/- and no claim made by the Complainant to the O.Ps against this policy. But there is no single document to prove the contention of the O.P. No. 2 that the complainant already received the maturity amount.
Besides, in the complaint petition the Complainant stated about the matured value of Rs. 38,420/- and booked plot measuring 3400 square ft. but the Complainant failed to produce any cogent documents to substantiate her case for which no relief can be awarded in this regard.
In the light of the foregoing discussion and relied on the original document it is proved that the Complainant deposited Rs. 30,000/- to the O.P. No. 1 through O.P. No. 2 and even after made several requests she did not receive the matured amount. O.P. No.1 being principal of Pratigya Housing Finance & Construction Company Ltd. in any way cannot deny liability to pay the said deposited amount with interest to the Complainant. Though the O.P. No. 2 acted as an agent of the O.P. No. 1 but he is familiar with the Complainant and the Complainant on good faith deposited the said amount as such the O.P. No. 2 cannot evade his liability. By not getting the maturity amount in due time the Complainant suffered mental pain and agony for which she must be compensated.
Considering the facts and circumstances it is reasonably be presume that the O.P. No. 1 has nothing to challenge the case. Besides, no argument made by the O.P. No. 2 before the Forum to substantiate his plea. As such on the basis on Evidence and material on record, we are of considered opinion that the complaint is deserve to be allowed.
Thus, the complaint succeeds on its merit.
ORDER
Hence, it is ordered that,
The Case No. DF-11/2014 be and the same is allowed in ex-parte against O.P. No.1&2 with cost of Rs. 5,000/- payable to the Complainant.
The O.Ps. are hereby directed to pay Rs.30,000/-, the deposited amount with interest 6% p.a. from 26. 10 2011 and Rs.5,000/- as compensation to the complainant for his deficiency in service. The O.Ps. are further directed to pay the ordered amount with litigation cost jointly and /or severally to the concerned party within 60 days failure of which the O.Ps. shall have to pay Rs.50/- each for each day’s delay and the amount to be accumulated shall be deposited in the “State Consumer Welfare Fund”, West Bengal.
Let plain copy of this Final Order be supplied, free of cost, to the concerned party/Ld. Advocate by hand/be sent under Registered Post with A/D forthwith for information and necessary action, as per Rules.
