BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.393 of 2017

Date of Instt. 13.10.2017

Date of Decision: 26.09.2018

Bhupinder Singh aged about 69 years son of Late Sh. Joginder Singh, resident of 151-L, Gurjepal Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. M/s Harinder Investments Ltd., 1^st Floor, Near Hotel Kings, G. T. Road, Jalandhar through its Director Sh. Maninder Pal Singh.

Alternate Address:92-B/4, Preet Nagar, Ladowali Road, Jalandhar.

2. Maninder Pal Singh, Director, M/s Harinder Investments Ltd.

3. Sarabjit Kaur, Director, M/s Harinder Investments Ltd.

4. Harinder Pal Singh, Director, M/s Harinder Investments Ltd.

All residents of #13, New G. T. B. Nagar, Extension-I, U Colony, Near Guru Ram Dass Public School, Jalandhar.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Harvimal Dogra (Member)

Present: Sh. DK Gupta, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.

OPs No.1 to 3 exparte.

Defence of OP No.4 Struck Off.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the OP No.1 company is Non Banking Financial Company, having certificate of registration under Section 451A of Reserve Bank of India, 1934 with authority to accept deposits from general public. That the complainant deposited following amounts in the shape of fixed deposit receipts @ 11% p. a. with OP No.1 and at the time of receipt of said amount, it was represented that maturity amount shall be given at date of maturity. Details of FDR's issued by OPs is given as under:-

2. That the complainant went to the office of OP No.1 to encash the aforesaid FDR's, but the OPs put off the matter on one pretext of the other. Thus, the OPs have failed to make payment of maturity amount of above said FDR's and has further failed to pay further interest @ 11% per annum, which amounts to deficiency in services and unfair trade practice. OP No.2 to 4 are directors of OP No.1 company and are incharge of day to day affairs of the OP No.1 company, as such OPs are also liable to make payment of aforesaid amount along with interest thereon till its realization. A legal notice was also served to the OPs, but no reply was given and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to make the payment of the maturity amount of aforesaid FDR along with interest @ 11% per annum from the date of maturity till its realization and OPs be also directed to pay compensation for mental agony and tension, to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/- .

3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and accordingly, all the OPs appeared through their counsels and OP No.1 to 3 filed joint written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable as is an abuse of process of law and further alleged that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and has concealed the true facts from the Forum and further averred that the present complaint of the complainant is barred by his act, conduct, admission and omission even the complaint is false and frivolous and filed by the complainant just to harass the OPs and therefore, the same be liable to be dismissed with compensatory cost. It is further alleged that no cause of action has arisen to file the present complaint to the complainant and the same is liable to be dismissed on this score alone. It is further alleged that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and even there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. On merits, all the averments made in the complaint are categorically denied and further submitted that if any amount is due against the OPs, then they are ready and willing to make the payment and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

4. OP No.4 appeared and took number of dates, but ultimately, failed to file a written reply and then defence of the OP No.4 was struck off on 18.12.2017.

5. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the complainant himself tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CA along with some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-7 and closed the evidence.

6. Similarly, counsel for the OP No.1 to 3 tendered into evidence affidavits Ex.OP-1, Ex.OP-2 and Ex.OP-3 of the OPs and make a request for further date for evidence of the OP No.1 to 3, but thereafter, OP No.1 to 3 never appeared and ultimately, OP No.1 to 3 were proceeded against exparte. No evidence has been led by the OP No.4 because his defence was already struck off

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant as well as counsel for the OP No.4 and also gone through the case file very minutely.

8. In nutshell, the case of the complainant is only that he deposited five different amounts by way of FDR (fixed deposit receipts) on different dates for a maturity date after about one year, the details of the amount deposited along with date and maturity date is very well mentioned in Para No.2 of the complaint, but after maturity of the said amount, the OPs miserably failed to reimburse the said maturity amount to the complainant and as such, there is a deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice.

9. In order to prove that the complainant has deposited the said amount on different dates for fixed deposit, the complainant has brought on the file photostat copy of the deposit receipts dated 03.11.2015 Ex.C-1, whereby deposited an amount of Rs.1,82,914/- and maturity amount is Rs.2,04,077/- on 03.11.2016, copy of the receipt is Ex.C-1. Second amount deposited by the complainant on 09.11.2015 i.e. Rs.2,47,613/- and maturity amount is Rs.2,76,262/- payable on 09.11.2016 and its receipt is Ex.C-2. Then complainant deposited third amount on 12.11.2015 of Rs.2,48,082/- and maturity amount is Rs.2,76,785/- payable on 12.11.2016 and its receipt is Ex.C-3. Then complainant deposited fourth amount on 16.11.2015 of Rs.2,47,613/- and maturity amount is Rs.2,76,613/- payable on 16.11.2016 and its receipt is Ex.C-4. Then complainant deposited fifth amount on 30.03.2016 of Rs.1,14,829/- and maturity amount of Rs.1,28,115/- payable on 30.03.2017 and its receipt is Ex.C-5.

10. In order to fortify the above fixed deposit receipts with the OP, the complainant has brought on the file his own affidavit Ex.CA and even a legal notice was also served to the OP, but they did not bother to reimburse the said amount. No doubt, in this complaint, defence of the OP No.4 is struck off, whereas OP No.1 to 3 appeared through their counsel and filed a reply as well as affidavit Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-3, but in the written reply, the OP No.1 to 3 has categorically admitted if any amount is due against the OP, then they are ready and willing to make the payment. So, it means the version of the complainant has been directly admitted by the OPs and they stated that they are ready to make payment, if any due. Further, the OP could not be able to bring on the file any evidence, whereby establish that the said maturity amount has been ever paid to the complainant, if so, then there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and the complainant is entitled to recover the said amount from all the OPs, who are jointly and severally liable to reimburse the said amount along with interest from the date of maturity as well as compensation.

11. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and all the OPs are directed to reimburse the maturity amount of the aforesaid all FDR's, to the complainant and further OPs are directed to pay further interest on the maturity amount @ 9% per annum from the date of maturity of each FDR, till realization. Further, OPs are directed to pay compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment, to the tune of Rs.50,000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

12. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Harvimal Dogra Karnail Singh

26.09.2018 Member President