DATE OF FILING : 03-03-2015.
DATE OF S/R : 27-08-2015.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 30-10-2015.
Sri Amit Manna,
son of late Manas Kumar Manna,
residing at 15, Nilkamal Kundu Lane,
P.O. & P.S. Shibpur, District – Howrah,
PIN – 711102……………………………………………………………….Complainant.
- Vs, -
- MPS Greenery Developers Ltd.
represented by its Chairman namely
Pramatha Nath Manna,
P 112, Block B, Lake Town, P.S. Lake Town,
Kolkata 700089.
- Shantanu Chowdhury,
Director,
P 112, Block B, Lake Town,
P.S. Lake Town,
Kolkata – 700089.……………………………………………….Opposite parties
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak .
F I N A L O R D E R
- Complainant, namely, Sri Amit Manna, by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to pay the deposited amount of the investment being Rs. 28,500/- and to pay compensation of Rs. 25,000/- for causing mental and physical harassment along with other orders as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
- Brief fact of the case is that complainant made an investment of Rs. 15,000/- under Bond Certificate being no. HW0090/08/09/006849 dated 26.08.2009 for 75 months. The maturity date of the bond certificate is 26.11.2015 but due to urgent need complainant informed by a letter dated 10.02.2015 to the o.ps. for refund of the deposited amount at the premature stage but the o.ps. did not pay any heed. Further complainant asked the o.ps. dated 23.02.2015 for refund of the amount but no fruitful result has come out. It is further stated by the complainant that due to this non action and gross negligence on the part of the o.ps., complainant has been compelled to face tremendous problem due to scarcity of money with which he was supposed to meet his day to day expenditure, medical expenditure, children’s education etc. which are really at stake. So, finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief.
- Notices were served. They did not appear and file written version. Accordingly, case was heard ex parte against the o.ps.
- Two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Although o.ps. have not filed written version in this particular case, they have filed written version and annexures in other alike cases like HDF Case Nos. 119 of 2014, 120 of 2014 and so on. It is to be mentioned here that o.ps. took a specific plea that SEBI had attached the bank account of the o.ps. since 25-10-2013. Even the o.ps. have also mentioned about Order no. RO/003/2014 ( Recovery Certificate no. 20 of 2013 ) dated 6th June, 2014 issued by Recovery Officer of SEBI restraining the o.ps. from disposing, transferring, alienating, changing all immovable properties held by the o.ps. vide Annexure. Also Directorate of Registration and Stamp Revenue, Government of West Bengal, vide their order dated 10-05-2013 has restrained the o.ps. from registering any of their property in favour of any 3rd party. To be precise, o.ps. have become totally handicapped with respect to making any payment to its investors. Even o.ps. have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint petition on the plea that complainants have not made SEBI as an opposite party who have attached their bank accounts. And on this very ground o.ps. are not in a position to withdraw any amount from their bank accounts. Here we take pause. O.ps. have not annexed any order of any higher authority showing that there is any kind of specific embargo on the payment of maturity amount of the complainant. And for argument sake, even if the bank accounts are attached by the SEBI, are the complainants responsible for that ? Why they should be harassed like anything? Even o.ps. made payments of maturity value in HDF Case No. 88 of 2014 and HDF Case No. 89 of 2014 on 23-05-2014 and 30-06-2014. In spite of existence of different orders passed by different authorities in 2013 whereby o.ps. were restrained from making any kind of payment, as there is no specific order of any higher court o.ps. could make such payment. People invest their hard earned money in a reputed company to get the ultimate benefit at their need. If they cannot utilize their hard-earned money at their bare necessities what is the use of making an investment or savings? Sacrificing many present enjoyments involving monetary expenditure, people make an investment for all future needs. So entire spirit of making investment is getting frustrated. Moreover, in this particular case the o.ps. have not filed any written version wherefrom it is crystal clear that they have nothing to put forward in their favour. And the allegations of the complainants against the o.ps .remained unchallenged and uncontroverted. And we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainants should be allowed in part without any compensation. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 91 of 2015 ( HDF 91 of 2015 ) be allowed ex parte without costs against the O.Ps.
That the O.Ps. are directed jointly and severally to pay the redemption value of the certificate in question being Rs. 28,500/- to the complainant of this instant petition with respect to bond certificate being no. HW009o/08/09/006849 within one month from this order i.d., 9% p.a. interest shall be charged till actual payment.
No order as to compensation.
The complainant do get an award of Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost and o.ps. are directed to pay the same within one month from this order i.d. amount shall carry an interest @ 9% p.a. till actual payment
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( Jhumki Saha )
Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.
