Complaint filed on: 18-05-2015
Disposed on: 29-07-2016
BEFORE THE BENGALURU IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027
CC.No.886/2015
DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF JULY 2016
PRESENT
SRI.H.S.RAMAKRISHNA, PRESIDENT
SRI.D.SURESH, MEMBER
SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER
Complainant: -
K. Jayavel
S/o Late S Krishnan
Aged 37 years
No.51, Nethravati Layout
Devasandra, K.R.Puram,
Bangalore-560052
V/s
Opposite parties:-
- M/s PACL India Ltd
No.22, 3rd floor,
Amber Tower
Sansar Chand Road
Jaipur – 302004
Rep by its Managing Director
- M/s PACL India Ltd
No.28, 7th floor,
Gopaldas Bhavan
Barakhamba Road
New Delhi-110001
Rep by its Director
- M/s PACL India Ltd
No.30/1, Leemans Complex
5th floor, Cunningham Road
Bangalore-560052
Rep by is Branch Manager
ORDER
SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER
This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, praying to pass an order, directing the OPs to pay such amount of Rs.1,28,135=00 as calculated and claimed to para 9 of complaint, together with future interest at 18% pa., on the said amount.
2. In the complaint, the complaint alleged that by believing the representation made by the OP No.3 of prompt payment of matured amount with attractive interest on deposits, he became member of Recurring Deposit Scheme of the OP company on 06.08.2007, under which, the complainant was remit Rs.800.00 per month for a period of 66 months with its assured/estimated maturity value of Rs.72,735.00 at the end of such period. On becoming member/subscriber, the complainant was issued a bond bearing No.5299699 dated 06.08.2007. Complainant accordingly remitted such monthly instalments and on expiry of 66 months, he surrender the Bond to OP No.3 on 29.07.2013. The OP No.3 issued an acknowledgement dated 29.07.2013 and the complainant was requested to come after 90 days. The complainant accordingly approached the OP No.3 during December 2013 for matured value. But, the cheque was not ready. After repeated visits, the OP No.3 issued cheque on 28.04.2014, which was collected by the complainant through his friend by name one Sri Yogesh, since the complainant was at Chennai at that time. The said cheque was bearing No.688628 dated 28.01.2014 for Rs.75,744.00 drawn in favour of the complainant on IDBI Bank ltd., Gandhinagar Branch, Bangalore. Its validity period for 3 months, but delivered on 28.04.2014. The complainant, immediately after return from Chennai, contacted the OP No.1, during 2nd/3rd week of May 2014 and returned the above cheque, requesting for issue of either fresh cheque or the same cheque, by correcting the date. On such approach, the OP No.3 informed that for complying with any such demand, permission of their corporate office was required and that therefore, sometime was required. The complainant accordingly waited and he was visiting OP No.3 repeatedly, to enquire about the cheque. But every time, reply of the OP No.3 was that permission for issue of fresh cheque or correct the date of old cheque was not yet received. By such answer of OP No.3 every time, the complaint was fed-up and ultimately got issued legal notice dated 09.03.2015 to the OPs calling upon them to pay matured value of the bond with interest thereon at 18% p.a. from the maturity date of the bond. The said legal notices duly served. After that, the OP No.1 is issued reply notice dated 25.03.2015 to the complainant. But thereafter there is no further response from the OPs in the matter. The hardship and suffering caused to the complainant and the complainant causing mental agony, getting hurt and irresponsible act amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OPNo.1 to 3. Hence the present complaint is filed.
3. Even though, the notice was served on the OP No.2, he failed to put his appearance. Hence he was placed exparte. In response to the notice the OP No.1 & 3 appeared through their counsel and OP No.2 filed an application U/s 151 of CPC for set aside the exparte order through his counsel. The said application was allowed and permitted the OP No.2 to proceed with the case. The OPs took sufficient time for filing version but, they have not filed the version and they failed to proceed with the case.
4. The complainant has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and closed his side. Heard the arguments.
5. Now the points that arise for consideration are:-
1. Whether the complainant has proved the
alleged deficiency in service by the Ops ?
2. If so, to what relief the complainant is
entitled ?
6. Our findings on the above points are:-
1. Point No.1: Affirmative
2. Point No.2: As per the final order
REASONS
7. It is the case of complainant, by believing the representation made by the OP No.3 of prompt repayment of matured amount with attractive interest on deposits, he became member of Recurring Deposit Scheme of OP company on 06.08.2007 under which, he was to remit Rs. 800.00 per month for a period of 66 months with its assured /estimated maturity value of Rs.72,735.00 at the end of such period. In support of this, the complainant produced the copy of the Bond bearing No.5299699 dated 06.08.2007. It is clearly shows that, the complainant is entered as a member of Recurring Deposit scheme of OP company on 06.08.2007
8. As looking in to the document i.e., copy of acknowledgement issued by OP dated 29.07.2013, it is clear that, the complainant remitted such monthly instalments and on expiry of 66 months, he surrendered the Bond to OP No.3 in order to receive matured value thereof on 29.07.2013 and OP No.3 issued an acknowledgement and requested to come after 90 days. After that the complainant received the cheque from OP No.3 in respect of the matured value through his friend on 28.04.2014. In support of this, the complainant produced the copy of the cheque bearing No.688628 dated 28.01.2014 for Rs.75,744.00 drawn in favour of the complainant on IDBI Bank ltd., Gandhinagar branch, Bangalore. It is clearly shows that the cheque being dated 28.01.2014, with its validity period for 3 months but issued on 28.04.2014, it is deficiency of service on the part of the OPs.
9. The complainant accordingly waited and he was contacted to OP No.3 repeatedly for enquire about the cheque. But reply of the OP NO.3 was that permission for issue of fresh cheque or correct the date of old cheque was not yet received from corporate office. By such answer of OP No.3 every time, the complainant was fed-up and ultimately issued legal notice calling upon them to pay matured value of the bond together with interest at 18% p.a. and compensation this is supported by the legal notice dated 09.03.2015. After issued the legal notice to OPs, the OP No.3 issued interim reply dated 25.03.2015 was received, seeking certain particulars. In reply thereto, complainant furnished such particulars under letter dated 16.04.2015 by RPAD. After that, there is no further response from the OPs in the matter. As looking in to the documents i.e., postal receipts, copy of the reply notice of OP No.2 and reply to reply notice by complainant, is clear that, the OPs fail to comply legal notice, thus clearly amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. Hence we answered these points in the affirmative. In the result for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
The complaint is allowed holding that there is deficiency in service by the OPs No.1 to 3.
The OPs No.1 to 3 are directed to pay a sum of Rs.72,735.00 to the complainant alongwith 18% interest p.a. on the said amount from 06.02.2013 to till the date of realization.
The OPs No.1 to 3 are further directed to pay Rs.10,000.00 to the complainant towards compensation and Rs.2,000.00 as cost of litigation.
This order is to be complied by the OPs No.1 to 3 within 30 days from the date of this order.
Supply free copy of this order to both parties.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Forum on 29th day of July 2016).
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
-:ANNEXURES:-
1. Witness examined on behalf of the complainant by way of affidavit:
K. Jayavel, who being the complainant was examined.
2. Documents produced on behalf of the complainant:-
1. Photocopy of the Bond bearing No.5299699 dated 06.08.2007
2. Photocopy of Acknowledgement issued by the O.P. No.3 on surrendering the above bond
3. Photocopy of the cheque dated 28.01.2014
4. Legal notice dated 09.03.2015 issued to OPs, together with Postal Receipts
5. Complaint given to the Bangalore District Office building Post Master about non-receipt of Postal Acknowledgements
6. Endorsement/Replies dated 06.04.2015 issued by the Postal Authority, confirming delivery of the above Notice to respective addresses
7. Interim Reply dated 25.03.2015 given by the 1st OPs Counsel addressed to Complainant’s Counsel
8. Letter dated 16.04.2014 sent by Complainant’s Counsel to 1st OP’s Counsel
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
ORDER
The complaint is allowed holding that there is deficiency in service by the OPs No.1 to 3.
The OPs No.1 to 3 are directed to pay a sum of Rs.72,735.00 to the complainant alongwith 18% interest p.a. on the said amount from 06.02.2013 to till the date of realization.
The OPs No.1 to 3 are further directed to pay Rs.10,000.00 to the complainant towards compensation and Rs.2,000.00 as cost of litigation.
This order is to be complied by the OPs No.1 to 3 within 30 days from the date of this order.
Supply free copy of this order to both parties.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Forum on 29th day of July 2016).
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
