DATE OF FILING : 13/10/2014.
DATE OF S/R : 29/12/2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 31/12/2015.
PRASANTA PAL,
S/O Late Satya Charan Pal,
Vill Bargazipur, P.O. Gazipur,
P.S. Amta,
Howrah-711 413………………………………………………………. COMPLAINANT.
NVD SOLAR LIMITED,
having its regional office
at Mankur More, Bagnan, District – Howrah,
PIN – 711303 and head office at 24/A, Karnani Estate,
209, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700017,
being represented by its Managing Director
viz. Shri Saibal Kumar Hazra, having its office at
24/A, Kamani Estate, 209, A.J.C. Bose Road,
Kolkata – 700017…………………………………………………......OPPOSITE PARTY.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.
F I N A L O R D E R
- Complainant, namely, Prasanta Pal, by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to refund Rs. 2,88,500/-, to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 25,000/- as litigation costs along with other relief or reliefs as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
- Brief fact of the case is that on being persuaded by O.P. 4, complainant made investments in different schemes like SSS & SPS of o.ps. 1, 2, 3, The o.ps. 1, 2, 3 issued money receipts vide Annexures in favour of the complainant.
- O.P. 1, 2, 3 promised to pay the monthly interest on the due dates accrued under SPS policy followed by an automatic credit of the said sum to the account of the complainant under SSS Policy. But since March 2014, O.Ps. did not pay any monthly interest. So complainant went to the office of the O.Ps. but they have returned the complainant without giving his monthly interest. It is further stated by the complainant that due to this non action and gross negligence on the part of the o.ps., complainant has been compelled to face tremendous problem due to scarcity of money with which he was supposed to meet his day to day expenditure, medical expenditure, children’s education etc. which are really at stake. So, on maturity of some bonds complainant went to the office of the O.Ps. 1, 2, 3. And he could understand that the o.ps. are trying to shut down their local office. So, finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief.
- Notices were served up on O.ps. Only O.P. 4 appeared and file written version. So the case was heard exparte against O.P. no. 1, 2, 3 and on contest against O.P. no. 4.
- Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the complaint petition along with annexures filed by the complainant and noted its contents. Complainant invested Rs. 2,00,000/- in total in the o.ps. company. It is a fact that o.ps. have failed to pay the monthly interest since March, 2014 for which complainant felt tremendous monetary problem. Because, people invest their hard earned money in a reputed company to get the ultimate benefit at their need. O.p. no. 1, 2, 3 have miserably failed to keep their promise which they made on the face of the certificates issued by them in favour of complainant. For their gross negligence in discharging duties, complainant had to suffer a lot for the crying need of money. Sacrificing many present enjoyments involving monetary expenditure, complainant made those investments foreseeing their future needs. If that criteria is not fulfilled due to o.ps.’ severe negligence, complainant is, thereby, truly prejudiced which can be very well understood by a man of common prudence. Moreover, the o.p. no 1, 2, 3 have not cared to appear before the Forum even after receiving summons. No W/V has been filed by them which clearly shows that they have nothing to put forward in their favour. And the complaint petition remains unchallenged and uncontroverted. And we have no difficulty to believe the unchallenged testimony of the complainant. O.ps. have miserably failed to keep promise which certainly amounts to deficiency in service coupled with unfair trade practice on their part which should not be allowed to be perpetuated for an indefinite period. O.P. 4 simply acted as an agent of O.P. no. 1, 2, 3. And O.P. no. 4 did not issue any money receipt. So for any act on the part of O.P. 4, O.P. no. 1, 2, 3 are vicariously and absolutely liable. And we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant should be allowed. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 548 of 2014 ( HDF 548 of 2014 ) be allowed ex parte with costs against the O.P. 1, 2, 3 and dismissed against O.P. no. 4 without cost.
That the O.P. no. 1, 2, 3 are jointly and severally directed to pay the principal amount or maturity amount (whichever is applicable) along with upto date monthly due interest in terms of the bonds in question within one month from this order i.d., @ 8% p.a. interest shall be charged on the entire decreetal amount till actual payment.
No order as to compensation.
The complainant do get an award of Rs. 2,000/- as litigation cost and o.p. is directed to pay the same within one month from this order i.d. amount shall carry an interest @ 8% p.a. till actual payment.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
(Jhumki Saha)
Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.
