Punjab

Amritsar

CC/15/426

Rajdeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

PACL India Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

01 Jan 2016

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
SCO 100, District Shopping Complex, Ranjit Avenue
Amritsar
Punjab
 
Complaint Case No. CC/15/426
 
1. Rajdeep Singh
25, East Gobind Nagar, St. no.8, Sultanwind Road, Amritsar
Amritsar
Punjab
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. PACL India Ltd.
P.no.2&3, Majitha Road, IDBI BAnk Building, Amritsar
Amritsar
Punjab
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Sh. Bhupinder Singh PRESIDENT
  Kulwant Kaur MEMBER
  Anoop Lal Sharma MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No. 426 of 2015

Date of Institution: 06.07.2015

Date of Decision:01.01.2016

 

 

Rajdeep Singh son of Kulwant Singh R/o House No. 25, East Gobind Nagar Street Gali No. 8, Inside Dramaanwali Gali, Sultanwind Road,Amritsar

Complainant

Versus

 

  1. P.A.C.L.India Limited through its authorized Officer/person having previous office at National Shopping Complex, SCO 100, 101, First Floor, G.T. Road, Amritsar at present P.No.2 & 3, First Floor, Building of IDBI Bank, Near Four Ess Mall Road Chowk, Majitha Road, Opposite Ram Ashram School, Amritsar
  2. P.A.C.L. India Limited through its authorized Officer/person registered office 22, 3rd Floor, Umber Tower, Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur
  3. P.A.C.L. India Limited through its authorized Officer/person 7th Floor, Gopal Dass Bhawan, 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi

Opposite Parties

 

Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present:    For the Complainant                  :  Sh. Rajesh Bhatia,Advocate

               For the Opposite Party     : Sh.Tarlochan Singh,Branch Manager

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member

Sh. Anoop Sharma, Member

 

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

  1. Present complaint has been filed by Rajdeep Singh under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he obtained a recurring deposit account No. U009027284 from opposite party No.1 on 27.6.2009 with quarterly installment of Rs. 1050/- and the total maturity amount alongwith interest was Rs. 32500/- and interest on the abovesaid recurring deposit was Rs. 10450/-. According to the complainant he paid the full installments to the opposite parties and submitted all the documents . Complainant has alleged that opposite parties did not pay the maturity amount to the complainant  despite so many requests made by the complainant. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties  to pay Rs. 32500/- alongwith interest . Compensation of Rs. 25000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.
  2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that opposite party is neither the financial establishment nor the non banking financial company and Insurance company. Opposite party is not collecting/accepting deposit from the public by promising lucrative high rate of interest nor issuing any policy. Opposite party is Real Estate Company and engaged in the business of sale and development of agriculture land/plot. The complainant entered into an agreement bearing registration No. U009027284 with the opposite parties for purchase of plot of land and deposited amount of Rs. 23100/- . It was submitted that opposite party never promised to pay any money to the complainant. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
  3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith payment receipts Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-22.
  4. Opposite parties tendered affidavit of Sh. Tarlochan Singh, Branch Manager Ex.OP1,2,3/1 alongwith documents copy of account statement Ex.OP1,2,3/2, copy of cheque dated 21.9.2015 Ex.OP1,2,3/3.
  5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the  complainant and opposite party and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the complainant and the opposite party.
  6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant obtained Recurring Deposit A/c No. U009027284 from opposite party No.1 on 27.6.2009 with quarterly installment of Rs. 1050/- for 5 ½ years (66 months). The maturity amount alongwith interest was Rs. 32,500/- and the interest on the abovesaid recurring deposit was Rs. 10450/-. The complainant paid full installments through receipts , some of which are Ex.C-2 to  Ex.C-21 to the opposite party . The said RC was to mature on 27.12.2014. The complainant submitted all the documents to opposite party No.1 for release of maturity value, but the opposite party did not release the maturity amount to the complainant despite so many requests made by the complainant.  Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
  7. Whereas case of the opposite parties is that   opposite party is a company and they did not receive any deposit from the complainant . It only received advance consideration for purchase of land/plot as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties for sale and development of land/plot. Opposite parties further submitted that  for the purchase of plot/land, the complainant deposited total sum of Rs. 23100/- under quarterly installment plan. So the complainant is not entitled to any amount. Opposite parties submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
  8. It may be mentioned here that during the proceedings of this case , opposite parties filed affidavit of Tarlochan Singh, Branch Manager of opposite party No.1 Ex.OP1 in which he submitted that opposite party had paid the full and final amount of Rs. 34,837/- to the complainant which included interest upto date on payment, to the complainant . As such nothing is due payable to the complainant. Opposite parties paid this amount to the complainant through demand draft No. 955579 dated 21.9.2015 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Branch Bhagtanwala, Amritsar, so this complaint has become infructuous. Opposite parties produced the statement of account of the complainant Ex.OP2 and copy of the demand draft Ex.OP3. Opposite parties submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
  9. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant obtained RD account bearing No.U009027284 from opposite party No.1 on 27.6.2009 with quarterly installment of Rs. 1050/-   The complainant paid all the  installments, receipts of which are Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-21. Opposite parties have also admitted this fact through the statement of account produced by the opposite parties Ex.OP2 in which it has been categorically mentioned that the date of commencement of this account is 27.6.2009 and date of maturity is 27.12.2014 and as per the statement of account, the complainant paid all the installments of this account. As such the opposite parties were bound to refund this amount of RD account alongwith interest to the complainant on maturity i.e. on 27.12.2014. But the opposite parties failed to pay this amount to the complainant on maturity i.e. on 27.12.2014 rather they paid this amount to the complainant through bank draft dated 21.9.2015 Ex.OP3 i.e. after a lapse of a period of 9 months. No doubt the opposite parties have paid the amount alongwith upto date interest to the complainant vide demand draft Ex.OP3 dated 21.9.2015, but the opposite parties paid this amount to the complainant after 9 months after the maturity of the aforesaid account and that too after the filing of the present complaint. All this fully proves that the complainant was forced to file this present complaint  and during the pendency of this complaint in this Forum, opposite parties made the payment to the complainant. So all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
  10. Consequently we hold that opposite parties are liable to pay compensation to the complainant.
  11.  Resultantly this complaint is disposed of with the directions to the opposite parties  to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs. 5000/-. Opposite parties are also directed to pay litigation expenses Rs. 1000/- to the complainant. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

 

01.01.2016                                                           ( Bhupinder Singh )

President

 

 

/R/                        ( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)           (Anoop Sharma)

Member                                   Member

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
[ Sh. Bhupinder Singh]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Kulwant Kaur]
MEMBER
 
[ Anoop Lal Sharma]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.