Judgment dated 26-07-2016

            This is a complaint made by one Basab Chakraborty son of late Ramesh Chandra Chakraborty residing at K/1, Belgachia Villa, Kolkata- 700 037 against M/s. Senco Jewellery Palace Abhusan Private Limited represented through its’ Director Shri Abhishek Sen and Shri Rana Sikdaran authorized agent of M/s. Senco Jewellery Palace Abhusan Private Limited praying for paying Rs.2,66,600/- and direction upon the OP No.1 to pay interest of the amount to the tune of 10% and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- with litigation cost of Rs.50,000/-.

            In brief the facts are that Complainant is a Manager of Multinational Company which runs business under name and style of M/s. Senco Jewellery Palace Abhusan Private Limited and deals with gold metal and silver metal ornaments and it is represented by Director, Abhishek Sen. Complainant saw an advertisement of OP in the daily newspaper and from the Website learn that in the year 1901 Moronchand Sen first laid the dream establishment at Tatibazar, Dhaka in the name of Senco Jewellers. This family business started expanding and his sons continued this business. After knowing this Complainant reached to the office of OP No.1 where he was welcomed by OP No.2 and asked to invest some money in their Jewellery Scheme. Accordingly, Complainant invested Rs.2,00,000/- on 29/8/2014 and he was issued certificate Serial No.6954 “Dhanvriddhi” on which redemption date was 29/8/2015. Complainant was told that the company is booking pure gold to the tune of 72.280 grams. On 31/8/2014 again invested Rs.22,000/-. Complainant has further stated in paragraph 8 that he invested Rs.20,00,000/- in that scheme of the OPs. On 12/3/2015 after the expiry date of the schemes Complainant tried to contact the Director but of no use. Thereafter Complainant was called at HDFC Bank and a cheque of Rs.2,10,000/- was given to him. Thereafter he received a mobile call not to present the cheque till 12/11/2015. After that despite repeated request OP No.1 & 2 did not hand over the gold or the money to the Complainant. So Complainant filed this case. OP filed written version and denied all the allegations of the complaint. Further OP has stated that Complainant had invested an amount in the OP’s company and had enjoyed the benefit. OP was supposed to hand over the gold to the Complainant but due to financial turmoil it could not be done. Further OP has stated that Complainant has violated the terms and so OP prays for dismissal of this case.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief for proving the allegations of the complaint wherein he has reiterated the facts mentioned in the complaint. Further he has stated that he has prayed for Rs.2,42,400/- and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.50,000/-. Against this questionnaire has been filed which was replied by Complainant.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs.

         First prayer of the Complainant is payment of Rs.2,66,000/- which is the amount involved in the cheque. Further it is not mentioned as to cheque nos. which involved this amount. On perusal of paragraph 12 of the complaint it appears that Cheque No.00002 dt. 12/10/2015 amounting to Rs.2,10,000/- , Cheque No.000023 dt.13/10/2015 amounting to Rs.24,200/-, Cheque No.000024 dt.14/10/2015 amounting to Rs.8,200/- and Cheque No.000024 dt.14/10/2015 amounting to Rs.24,200/-were issued by Abhishek Sen.

            So it is clear that Complainant himself is not aware as to how much amount he will receive from the OPs. Further on calculating the cheque mentioned the amount comes to Rs.2,66,600/-. But surprisingly Complainant has not made it clear as to whether he presented the cheques and those bounced back or OPs have directed him not to present the cheques. Further more the complaint does not make it clear about the terms and conditions of the refund of money which Complainant invested.

            So fundamental rule is that Complainant must go to the Court or Forum with clean hands which are not done here and the facts mentioned in the complaint do not suggest that Complainant is entitled to the reliefs.

            At one place Complainant has mentioned that he has invested Rs.20,00,000/- but he does not intend to get relief in that respect. He has also not mentioned as to what happened to that Rs.20,00,000/-. This Forum has a jurisdiction only up to Rs.20,00,000/- but the dispute of the Complainant with the OPs appears to be more than Rs.20,00,000/- and in such circumstances we are of the view that Complainant cannot be given piecemeal relief. As such we do not find any ground to allow relief to the Complainant.

            Hence,

            O R D E R E D

            CC/65/2015 and the same is dismissed on contest.