PRESENT
Complainant in person.
Opponent by Adv. Ms.D.V. Postvala present.
ORDER
(Per- Mr. S. D. MADAKE, Hon’ble President.)
1. The complainant invested money in Mutual Fund scheme Zurich Equity Fund, option dividend re-investment folio no.11775609/17. That fund later became HDFC equity fund. The opponent nos.1 and 2 are responsible for the said fund.
2. The complainant received communications statement of dividend, cheques from opponent at his registered address as per original application on 22/03/2011. A dividend was announced in the said scheme and accordingly complainant was supposed to be credited with units equivalent to an amount of Rs.51,881.78 ps. in his folio no.1177569/17. It is alleged that opponents failed to credit the folio of complainant the dividend amount and also to pay actual amount by cheque.
3. The complainant stated that opposite parties failed to inform him about the dividend, even after repeated demands. On 05/05/2011 and thereafter he send mails, but there was only standard reply that they shall respond shortly. They replied on 18/05/2011 that dividend cheque has been returned and was lying with them. Complainant received a cheque on 08/06/2011 for Rs.51,881.78 ps. without any interest which was not applicable to him, which was returned on the next day.
4. The complainant stated that various letters were sent to opponent during 01/06/2011 to 31/10/2011. Opponent agreed to make payment of some amount as “goodwill gesture” which was not applicable to him. The act of opponent caused mental anguish to him. They are liable to pay interest at 15% p.a. due to failure in payment of dividend within a month. They made no serious attempt to deliver the dividend cheque.
5. The complainant prayed that opponents be directed to pay to the complainant the dividend amount of Rs.51,881.78 ps. with interest at Rs.18% p.a. with costs.
6. The opposite party filed written statement on 13/05/2013 and stated that entire complaint is bogus, without any substance and violation of privilege given to the consumer under the law. It is alleged that complainant was eligible to receive dividend for an amount of Rs.51,881.78 ps. for his investments. The said amount was not reinvested as complainant failed to provide his permanent account number as required under SEBI. Regulations.
7. The opponents stated that dividend warrant with cheque was dispatched through courier on 26/03/2011 within 30 days, which was returned undelivered. The same was dispatched on second time on 29/04/2011 which was not delivered. The complainant was requested to comply with requirements of “know your customer” norms as stipulated under prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, however he neglected to do so.
8. The opponent stated that there is no deficiency in service. In fact, opponent dealt with matter in diligent and professional manner. The opponent had informed its unit holders about dividend declaration in the manner prescribed by SEBI Mutual Funds Regulations, 1996.
9. The opponent stated that complainant did not accept his full dividend payment being offered to him by returning it back nine times on one pretext or the other. It is stated that complainant is at liberty to withdraw his investment and has no compulsion to continue dealing with opponent.
10. The opponent stated that complainant by his own refusal denied the amount of dividend with intention of extracting more amount. The prayer is made to dismiss complaint with heavy costs.
11. The complainant filed on record account statement dated 18/05/2011, copies of mails and letters sent to opponent, application for allotment of units etc. The opponent filed 18 documents relating to letters sent to complainant regarding payment of divided and cheques.
12. We have perused carefully all the documents, affidavits and written submissions of both parties. The complainant has invested amount with opponent and opponent party declared the amount of dividend on 22/03/2011. The complainant was eligible to get Rs.51,881.78 ps.
13. As per law, the dividend amount is payable within 30 days and on failure to pay within stipulated time, said amount shall carry interest at 15%. There is no dispute about the quantum of amount. The only issue is whether opponent is guilty for deficiency in service, by failure to make payment as per terms of agreement.
14. Admittedly, complainant invested fund (money) in Mutual Fund, option dividend re-invest. It was necessary on the part of opponent to reinvest the amount of Rs.51,881.78 ps. as opted by complainant. However, opponent explained that as the amount was more than Rs.50,000/-, the permanent account number of complainant was necessary, which was not provided by complainant. There is no dispute about this.
15. The main issue is regarding the payment of dividend amount with interest or without interest. According to complainant, the amount has not been received as per norms, which was not accepted. Admittedly, letter sent to complainant with the cheque dated 29/03/2011 and letter sent on next day were not reached to the complainant. The reply send by opponent to complainant on 05/05/2011 admitted that dividend cheque has been returned undelivered.
16. The admission of opposite party by e-mail dated 05/05/2011 shows that complainant has not received the amount within the stipulated time of 30 days. It is true that opponent sent cheque and dispatched on 29/03/2011, however, the same was not delivered to complainant. This is not strict compliance of the rules laid down by SEBI. This may be termed as a deficiency in service.
17. The correspondence between complainant and opponent indicate that opposite party has always been ready and willing to pay the amount of dividend, however, the complainant was insisting for the interest at 18% or at least 15% p.a. from the date of 22/03/2011. The complainant denied to accept the amount of dividend on the ground that, part payment was not acceptable to him as the amount was without interest.
18. We have considered submissions of both parties and we are of the view that opponent shall pay interest on the amount of Rs.51,881.78 ps. at the rate of Rs.15% p.a. During 22/03/2011 to 05/05/2011 till the date, complainant was intimated by mail that the amount of cheque was returned undelivered.
19. We also feel it proper in the interest of justice, in view of the fact that the said amount is still with opposite party, the said amount shall ' carry interest' at the rate of Rs.9% p.a. from 06/05/2011 till realization of the amount. In view of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered view that both parties shall bear their own costs.
20. In the result, we pass the following order.
Order
- RBT Complaint Case No. 315/2012 is partly allowed.
2. The opposite party HDFC Mutual Fund is directed to pay the amount of
Rs.51,881.78 ps. (Rupees fifty thousand, eight hundred eighty one and
seventy eight paise only) to complainant with interest at the rate of
Rs.15/% p.a. during 22/03/2011 to 05/05/2011.
3. The opponent shall pay the amount with interest at Rs.9% p.a. From
06/05/2011 till realization of total amount.
4. No order as to cost.
5. Copy of this order be sent to both parties.
