Judgement dt.22-5-2017
Balaka Chatterjee, Member
This petition of complaint is filed u/s. 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 by Shri Asim Kumar Basu and Sm. Kakoli Basu alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs 1. M/s. Teacher’s Welfare Credit and Holding Ltd. 2. Sri Swapan Ghosh 3. Sri Madhusudan Chakraborty 4. Sri Anjan Kumar Bhattacharya 5. Sri Tridib Kumar Das 6. Smt. Sipra Cahkraborty 7. Smt. Kalpana Bose.
Case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainants have opened three recurring accounts bearing nos.6765, 6766 & 6767 with the OP No.1 on 8.3.14 and the Complainant continued to pay monthly deposit of Rs.15,000/- for 12 months against a/c. no.6765, monthly deposit of Rs.25,000/- against a/c. no 6766 for 12 months, monthly deposit of Rs.50,000/- against a/c. no. 6767 for 12 months and the OPs agreed to pay a sum of Rs.1,90,500/- against a/c. no.6765, an amount of Rs.3,17,500/- against a/c. no. 6766 and Rs.6,35,000/- against a/c. no. 6767. On the date of maturity 8.3.2015 under the OP No.1 Company a non banking organization run by a Board of Directors i.e. the OP Nos.2 to 7.
The Complainants have further stated that for disbursement of matured amount in respect of the said three recurring a/cs. By the OPs, the Complainants deposited the passbooks with the OP No.1 and subsequently visited the office of the OP No.1 frequently so that they might get the disburse amount therefrom but they had to return with empty hand. It is further stated by the Complainants that the OPs issued two post dated cheques bearing nos.924874 dt.20.7.2015 drawn on United Bank of India Bijoygarh College Branch, Kolkata in favour of Sri Asim Kumar Basu the Complainant No.1 for an amount of Rs.5,24,933/- and 2. A Cheque bearing no. 924875 dt.20.8.2015 drawn on United Bank of India, Bijoygarh College Branch, Kolkata in favour of Kakali Basu the Complainant No.2 for an amount of Rs.6,61,458/- payable through A/c. No.0402050011185 i.e. the account no of the OP No.1 under the said United Bank of India. It is specifically stated by the Complainants that while issuing the said cheques the signatory requested the Complainants not to deposit the said cheques without prior intimation to them and in case of non encashment of the said cheques the entire amount would be paid by bank draft to be issued in favour of the Complainants. It is the specific allegation of the Complainants that inspite of such assurance of disbursement of the said amount by bank draft the OPs did not do the same though the Complainants did not deposit the said cheques on aqssurance of the OPs. The Complainants further stated that they served the letter dt.18.6.2016 upon the OPs requesting for payment of the matured amount in respect of the said recurring deposits but no fruitful result has been yielded so far. Accordingly the Complainants have prayed for direction upon the OPs to pay Rs.11,86,391/- being matured amount in respect of Account Nos. 6765, 6766 and 6767, to pay Rs.6,00,000/- as compensation, to pay Rs.15,000/- as litigation cost and an interest @18% for delayed payment.
The OP Nos. 1 & 2 contested and filed written version. The OP Nos. 4 & 6 also contested the case by filing written version separately.
In their written version the OP Nos. 1 & 2 have stated that the OPs have no deficiency in providing service as it will be evident from the petition of complaint that the Complainants themselves admitted that the OPs issued two cheques towards disbursement of the matured amount of the three recurring deposits. The OP Nos. 1 & 2 have specifically stated that the Complainants fail to deposit the said cheques due to their negligence but shifting the responsibility for non-encashment of the said cheques upon the OPs. Accordingly the OP No.2 have prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost. It is mentioned particularly that the OP No.3 had died.
In their written version OP Nos. 4 & 6 have stated that they did not receive the deposited amount from the Complainant and therefore, they have no liability to refund the same and moreover, they intended to resign from the Directorship from the OP No.1 Company on 2014 since they have no deficiency of service and accordingly prays for dismissal of the case.
The Complainant adopted the petition of complaint as affidavit-in-chief and the OP Nos. 4 & 6 addheed affidavit-in-chief followed by cross examination in the form of questionnaire and thereafter filed affidavit-in-reply .
The OP Nos. 4 & 6 reiterated the facts mentioned in their written version.
In course of hearing Ld. Advocate for the Complainant stated that the Complainants on good faith deposited the money with the OP No.1 in assurance to get back the deposited amount with interest on maturity. The OP issued two cheques against the matured amount of Rs.5,24,933/- and Rs.6,61,458/- but the same has not been deposited by the Complainant for encashment . On several occassion the Complainants requested the OP to disburser the matured amount in favour of them but the OPs showed reluctance aand acted in deceitful manner. In support of Ld. Advocate for the Complainant relied upon the decissions of Hon’ble N.C.D.R.C. reported in 2013(3)CPR 214 [T.P. Balagopal Vs Alexandar John V.S. & Ors.]
Ld. Advocate of OP Nos.4 & 6 submitted that they are not liable at all regarding the instant matter since they rendered voluntary service to the benefit of retired teachers.
Points for determination
Whether the Complainants are consumer under the OPs
Is there any deficiency in service
Are Complainants entitled to the reliefs as prayed for
Point No.1
The Complainants availed financial service to be provided by OP No.1, organisation and thus became consumer under the same. The other OPs. being Directors of the said OP No.1 organisation are considered to be service providers on behalf of the OP No.1 and therefore the Complainants have become consumer under all OPs.
It is observed that the OP Nos. 4 & 6 by filing written version intimated about death of OP No.3 of the Complainants inspite of being intimated so did not take any step for substitution since more than 90 days are over from the date of knowledge of death of OP No.3 by the Complainants the case is abetted in respect of OP No.3.
Point No.2 & 3
Both points are taken up together for comprehensive discussion and decission.
Admittedly the Complainants opened three recurring account with the OP No.1. Admittedly the three deposits attained maturity. Admittedly the OPs issued cheques of Rs.11,86,391/- towards disbursement of matured amount. Admittedly those cheques have not been deposited by the Complainants. Point of controversy is, as Complainants have submitted that on assurance of issuance of bank draft towards disbursement of matured amount by the OPs. The Complainants did not deposit the said cheques. On the other hand the OPs said that due to their own negligence the Complainants failed to deposit the same cheques on the bank and therefore they have neither deficiency nor any liability with the same.
Be that as it may facts remains that no amount has been credited to the account of the Complainants towards maturity amount of the said recurring deposit. Evidently the same are lying with the OP organization and they are liable to disburse the amount to the Complainants. The OPs cannot take advantage of the mistake committed by Complainant in respect of non-encashment of the said cheques. Since the said amount lying with the organization is to pay the interest @3.5% p.a. accrued on the said amount from the date of maturity till realization thereof. As regards the compensation it is admitted that the OPs disburse the cheques in time and therefore they are not entitled to any amount for interest. We hold same view regarding prayer for litigation cost. In the result the petition of complaint succeeds in part.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
CC/450/2016 is allowed in part on contest against the OP Nos.1, 2, 4 & 6 and ex-parte against OP No.5 but without any order as to cost.
The Opposite Party No.1, 2, 4, 5 6 are directed to pay Rs.11,86,391/- towards maturity amount of the recurring deposits to the Complainants with interest @ 3.5 % p.a. to be accrued thereon from 8/3/2015 till realization thereof in full. The entire amount is payable within one month from the date of this order.
