DATE OF DISPOSAL: 12.11.2020.
Dr. Aswini Kumar Mohapatra,President:
The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant has filed this consumer complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Party (in short the O.P.) and for redressal of her grievance before this Forum.
2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that the complainant is a woman and farmer by profession. The complainant came across the financial schemes advertised and floated by the O.P. The schemes are (1) Universal Magic Box Benefit (2) Super Magic Box Benefit which were alluring and having lucrative payments in return to the depositors and investors. Before understand the entire concept of the above scheme, the complainant deposited an amount of Rs.1558/- as per scheme according to the advertisement made by the O.P. in the month of September-October 2009. When the complainant claimed the matured amount, the O.P. cunningly converted the said matured amount in Micro Credit and fixed the maturity amount to Rs.2706/- as per deposit of Rs.1558/- and fixed the maturity date to some other date and time in the month of September 2017. The O.P. with a false assurance collected the said micro credit passbook and certified form of money receipts from the complainant on 10.08.2016. After maturity date, when the complainant approached and claimed the maturity amounting of Rs.2706/-, the O.P. has paid deaf ear to the complaint of the complainant. Time and again the complainant approached to the O.Ps for the deposited amount after maturity. But all her efforts became futile then the complainant approached and authorized one consumer protection centre of the Bramhapur city namely ‘VEDIC’ to help to redress the matter. Accordingly, the VEDIC on behalf of the complainant issued a Demand Notice dated 19.10.2017 through Registered post with AD on 27.10.2017 to the present O.P. along with two other responsible persons of the Datum Marketing Company but all in vain. Construed upon the acts up the O.Ps she alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to pay value of the service of Rs.2706/-with 18% interest, Rs.4718/- towards expenses incurred by the complainant during these periods for redress the grievance, compensation of Rs.2000/- and cost of Rs.1500/- in the best interest of justice.
3. Notices were issued against the Opposite party. The O.P. appeared through her advocate but not filed any written version. The complainant consequently prayed for exparte hearing despite availing sufficient opportunities by the O.P. after expiry of statutory period of filing written version without prejudice of the complainant. As such the intention of legislature going to be asteroid in accordance with the principles of lex-comitatus. Hence the O.P. was declared exparte on dated16.10.2020.
4. On the date of hearing of the consumer complaint, the Secretary VEDIC Organization, Bramhapur on behalf of the complainant is present. We heard argument from him for the complainant at length and perused the complaint petition, written argument and materials placed on the case record. In the instant case it reveals that neither the complainant has filed any documentary evidence i.e. deposit receipt nor any fixed deposit receipt of money etc. in support of her claim. But taking the sole testimony of the complainant as well as affidavit in to consideration, we accepted the contentions of the complainant as true. Law is well settled in case of Mrs. Puneet Kaur versus Hindustan Financial Management Ltd. and others reported in 2003(1) CPR 274 where in the Hon’ble National CDR Commission, New Delhi has held that “Non payment of fixed deposit amount on its maturity by Financial Institution constitutes deficiency in service”.
In view of the above decision and the provisions of law, the complainant’s case is partly allowed on exparte against the O.P. The Opposite Party is directed to pay the maturity value of Rs.2706/- (Rupees Two Thousand Seven Hundred Six) only to the complainant along with 8% interest per annum from the date of filing this case i.e. on 22.10.2019 within 60 days from receipt of this order. Further the O.P. is also directed to pay Rs.1000/- for compensation alongwith Rs.500/- as costs of litigation to the complainant within the above stipulated period failing which all the dues shall carry 12% interest per annum.
The order is pronounced on this day of 12th November 2020 under the signature and seal of this Forum. The office is directed to supply copy of order to the concerned parties free of cost and a copy of same is to be sent to the server of www.confonet.nic.in for posting in internet and thereafter the file be consigned to record room.
