DATE OF FILING : 20-02-2014.
DATE OF S/R : 21-03-2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 28-11-2014.
Shambhu Nath Sen Gupta,
son of late Kshitish Chandra Sen Gupta,
residing at 112, Bireswar Chatterjee Street, P.O. & P.S. Bally,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711201......................................................... COMPLAINANT.
Versus -
1. MPS Greenery Developers Ltd.,
having its registered office at MPS Enclave,
Commercial Building, Village – Dighisole,
P.O. Dahijuri, Jhargram, West Midnapore,
PIN – 721504.
2. MPS Greenery Developers Ltd.
being represented by its Director
viz. Mr. Santanu Chowdhury,
having its Kolkata office at
MPS Enclave, P-112, Block ‘B’ Lake Town,
Kolkata – 700089
3. MPS Greenery Developers Ltd.
being represented by its in-charge Viz.
Mr. Bidesh Mukherjee,
Having its unit office at ‘Anjali Complex’
Chinsurah Station Road, Bankim Kanan,
Hooghly – 712102.
4. MPS Greenery Developers Ltd.
being represented by its in-charge Viz.
Mr. Palash Pattanayak and Mr. Amit Adya
having its unit office at
11/2/1, Bhagawan Chatterjee Lane,
Howrah – 711101.
- Allahabad Bank,
Bally Branch, having its branch office at
430, G.T. Road, P.O. and P.S. Bally,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711201........................................................................Opposite Parties.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
Complainant namely Shambhu Nath Sen Gupta by filing apetition 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 his entire amounts of MIS Schemes and Recurring Deposits amounting to Rs.2,43,283/- plus interest, to pay an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment and litigation costs of Rs. 25,000/- along with other orders as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
- Brief fact of the case is that complainantmade investments in MISSchemes and Recurring Depositsissued by the o.ps., videAnnexures P/1 to P/4.The certificate nos. are as follows :
Shambhu Nath Sen Gupta – MIS Bond Nos. 0/07/03/B00081,
0/10/03/000159, 0/10/03/000160.
Recurring Deposit Certificate No. A/07/10/009242.
- O.Ps. promised to pay the maturity amounts of MIS Schemes and Recurring Deposits on the due dates. But it is alleged by the complainant that o.ps. have not paid his maturity amount without assigning any valid reason. Complainant repeatedly went to the office of o.ps. but on different pleas they have returned the complainant. It is further stated by the complainant that with this matured amount, he is to run his livelihood, meet 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. Theyappeared but no W/V was filed. Accordingly, case was heard on ex parte.
- Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
- Whether the complainant isentitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written version filed by o.ps. and noted its contents. It is to be noted that o.ps. have paid Rs. 1,43,283/- on 23-05-2014 and Rs. 50,000/- on 30-06-2014 to the complainant. So the principal amount of investment of Rs. 50,000/-is yet to be paid by the o.ps. to the complainant. Since 30-06-2014 the o.ps. remained absent and no W/V was filed by them. It is the specific plea taken by o.ps. in other alike cases that SEBI had attached the bank account of the o.ps. since 25-10-2013 which would be evident from the series of Annexures attached with the BNA filed by them. Even the o.ps. have also attached 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. Even o.ps. have prayed for dismissal of the instant complaint petition. 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 this very ground o.ps. could make part payment to 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? 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. O.ps. have miserably failed to keep their promise which they made on the face of the Bond certificates issued by them in favour of complainants. For their own wrong doings, why complainants should suffer at all ? Moreover, here in this case o.ps. have not filed any written version. Accordingly, the plea taken by o.ps. in other cases although considered but cannot be tenable with respect to the non-payment of maturity values. O.ps. have miserably failed to keep their own promise which certainly amounts to deficiency in service on their part which should not be allowed to be perpetuated for an indefinite period. And we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainants should be allowed. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 88 of 2014 ( HDF 88 of 2014 ) be allowed ex parte with costs against the O.Ps.
That the O.Ps. are directed jointly and severally to pay the maturity amount of Rs. 50,000/- with respect to the certificate held by the complainant within one month from this order i.d., 10% p.a. interest shall be charged on the entire decreetal amounts till actual payment.
The complainant do get an award Rs. 2,000/- as compensation and 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 @ 10% 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.
