Order-30.
Date-13/07/2015.
Complainants by filing this complaint has submitted that complainants invested of Rs. 20,000/- in non-convertible Debentures for 14 years and Rs. 5,000/- in NCD and further invested Rs. 1,700/- in Recurring Deposit (RD) of the op Moonlaugh Project India Ltd.
Subsequently in the year 2012 Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. was merged with Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. and Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) is a subsidiary unit of Ronton Drug & Parmaceuticals of the samd address and so complainants were the consumer under Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. and thereafter same was amalgamated in the year 2012 with IIHL.Under IIHL complainants are the consumer and after certain maturity IIHL issued a cheque bearing No. 263950 dated 19.12.2014 and that was post dated cheque dated 15.06.2014 which was bounced and returned on 27.06.2014 vide SBI Memo No. 001441/070001/20 deducting a penalty of Rs. 102/- and after surrendering the documents on 25.07.2013 payment is denied to the complainant by the op when they visited the office of the IIHL to communicate about bounced cheque.When one of the said directors of IIHL asked to know the fate of the maturity.But they denied the payment of maturity on 03.08.2014 and in the above circumstances, complainant is completely deceived by the ops and for their negligent and deficient manner of service, complainants have prayed for refund of Rs. 20,000/- along with interest, Rs. 5,000/- along with interest, Rs. 10,000/- along with interest, Rs. 15,000/- along with interest, Rs. 15,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as legal expenses.
On the other hand op Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) by filing written statement submitted that 50 Nos of non-convertible debentures stand in the name of one Nandita Ghosh and 200 such non convertible debentures stand in the name of Mousumi Ghosh and complainants invested Rs. 1,700/- in recurring deposit etc. as claimed by the complainant.
It is further submitted that there is no such documents to prove that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. is amalgamated with the present op Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) and moreover cheque was issued by Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. who has no connection with the op and further denied all the allegations for which the present complaint should be dismissed because same is not tenable against the present op on the ground that there is no contract in between the complainants and IIHL and prayed for dismissal of this case.
Decision with reasons
On careful consideration of the argument as advanced by the complainant and also the Ld. Lawyer for the op IIHL and further considering the defence of the op, it is clear that it should be decided at first whether Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. was merged with the Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) or not, or Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. is wholly owned subsidiary unit Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) or not because op Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) has taken a defence that there is no relation in between Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL)and Moonlaugh Project India Ltd.
In this regard complainant has filed a letter of offer issued by Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) by their Chairman and that copy was received by the complainant and complainant has submitted it wherefrom it is found that the Chairman of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) issued a letter of offer to the customer addressing to the customer in such a form “We are pleased to inform you that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. wholly owned subsidiary of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) is privately placing its Secured Non-Convertible Redeemable Debentures of Rs,5 crores.We invite you to participate in the above issue for high yield and full security of your investment of the following terms and conditions.You are requested to confirm your acceptance of the above offer on the terms and conditions outlined herein by sending the application from dully filled in along with draft/cheque in favour of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL), payable at Kolkata to the address mentioned in the application form.It may please be noted that the above offer is made specifically to you and is not to be circulated”.
Practically op has not denied the above fact and if we consider that document, then it is clear that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. is wholly owned and subsidiary of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL).So, it is proved that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. sold the same.But Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) is the owner of Moonlaugh Project India Ltd.So, it is clear that Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) is also equally liable for selling such item in the market and it is their act and at the same time the act of Moonlaugh Project India Ltd.
Truth is that Nandita Ghosh purchased 50 debentures vide Allotment Letter No. F/11/40, Folio No. HW/11/16 from Moonlaugh Project India Ltd., Kolkata.Similarly Mousumi Ghosh purchased non convertible redeemable debentures vide Folio No. HX/11/47, Allotment Letter No. E/11/07 and norm of debentures is 200 and redeemable date is 24.10.2025.Similarly Probhat Narayan Ghosh deposited one year term deposit, he paid Rs. 9,000/- to Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. up to 09.04.2013.
Fact remains that ops for the purpose of paying some amount issued a cheque to Probhat Narayan Ghosh for a sum of Rs. 34,000/- and that was of dated 15.06.2014 but that was dishonoured for which it was returned.Complainant reported the matter to the op, but op did not take any step or did not pay the said amount as yet.No doubt the Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. and Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) are two companies registered under Company Act and from the registration certificate of the two companies, it is clear that Deb Mallya Ghosh, Sumita Saha and Swapan Kumar Saha are the directors of both the compnies.
So, it is clear that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. and Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) are run by same Board of Directors and it is admitted by their own declaration that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. is owned and subsidiary company of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL).When that is the fact, then any act done by the directors in respect of selling any items of Moonluagh Project India Ltd. is legally responsible for any over act and same shall be treated as act of the Board of Directors of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL).
But we have gathered after considering those documents that Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) appeared and tried to convince that there is no relation between the Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) and Moonlaugh Project India Ltd.But from op no.2’s own document as produced by the complainant, it is clear that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. is owned and subsidiary of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL).So, the defence as taken by the op is false and fabricated and only to cheat the poorer section of people of West Bengal like this complainant they have taken such a plea thinking that this poorer section of people shall not be able to prove the relationship in between the Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. and Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL).
No doubt in this case complainant after hectic search and attempt somehow collected the letter what he received from Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) and that receipt has somehow saved the complainant from the hands of this dishonest company like Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL) who has tried to shift their liabilities upon the Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. expressing that there is no relation in between the Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. and Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL), but that attempt of the op has been completely frustrated by their own letter which was in the custody of the complainant and that letter has proved that Moonlaugh Project India Ltd. is owned and is a subsidiary of Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL).
So, in all respect both the ops are jointly responsible for repayment of all the non convertible redeemable debentures and other deposits which was made by the complainants and at the same time it is found that as interim payment Rs. 34,000/- was paid by cheque but that was dishonoured.So it is proved that this op has no desire or willingness to repay the amount against such convertible redeemable debentures and other deposits and no doubt ops collected huge amount from the public in such a manner and public purchased it on the basis of the misleading advertisement of the ops regarding payment of higher interest and with hope of good return.They deposited it, but ultimately they are deceived by the ops which is proved and no doubt it is negligence and deficient manner of act on the part of the ops and no doubt ops have not rendered proper service for which this complainant has suffered much and they have been harassed no doubt which is also proved from the fact that in the present case Indus Infra Hitech Ltd. (IIHL)appeared and never admitted that those amounts were received by them as convertible debentures and other fixed deposits etc. should be issued and considering that conduct of the ops, we are convinced that their acts tantamounts to unfair trade practice and deceitful manner of trade for which those complainants as consumers are entitled to get relief as prayed for.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against op no.2 with cost of Rs. 10,000/- and same is allowed against op no.1 exparte with cost of Rs. 5,000/-.
Ops jointly and severally are hereby directed to refund a sum of Rs. 35,000/- in total (F.D., R.D. etc.) i.e. including interest at the rate 12 percent p.a. w.e.f. September 2014 and till its full payment to the complainant.
For harassing the complainant and for causing mental pain and agony to the complainant in such a manner by the ops, ops are also directed to pay penal compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant also.
For adopting unfair trade practice on the part of the op no.2, op no.2 shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as penal damages to this Forum and it is imposed only to check such sort of malpractice and unfair trade practice and deceitful manner of trade as adopted by the op no.1 and op no.1 shall have to deposit the same to this Forum at once.
Ops jointly and severally are hereby directed to satisfy the decretal amount as awarded within one month from the date of this order, failing which for non compliance of the Forum’s order, penal action shall be started against them u/s 25/27 of C.P. Act 1986 for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed.
