Punjab

Sangrur

CC/73/2015

Rinky - Complainant(s)

Versus

PACL India Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Raj Kumar Singla

11 Jun 2015

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                     Complaint no. 73

                                                                      Instituted on:  11.02.2015

                                                                     Decided on:    11.06.2015

 

Rinky wife of Ravi Kumar resident of Water Works Pump Industrial, Focal Point, Sangrur.                                                                                  …. Complainant.   

                                         Versus

PACL India Limited, Opp. H.D.F.C. Bank, Near Goyal Laboratory Dhuri Gate, Sangrur through its Manager.

             ….Opposite party.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:    Shri Raj Kumar Singla, Advocate                          

 

FOR THE OPP. PARTY     :     Shri Naresh Juneja, Advocate                     

 

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

K.C.Sharma, Member

Sarita Garg, Member

                                   

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Rinky, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite party (referred to as OP in short) on the ground that she obtained RD policy  bearing no. U107098646 dated 20.01.2009 from the OP  which was to be matured on 20.07.2014 and the maturity amount  was Rs.29,100/-.  After maturity date, the complainant had submitted all the relevant  documents  to the OP under acknowledgment dated  02.08.2014 but she had not received the amount till date. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

i)      OP be directed to make the payment of Rs.29,100/- plus Rs.3100/-  as interest amount,  

ii)     OP be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment and to pay Rs.3300/- as litigation expenses.

2.             In reply filed by the OP, preliminary objections on the grounds of maintainability, jurisdiction and cause of action have been taken up.  It is stated that M/s PACL  Limited is a registered company under the Companies Act 1956 and it is engaged in the real estate business and also in the  business of sale and development of  agricultural land/  plot across  the country and allot the  land to the customer  for which an agreement is executed  between the company and the customer and there is a specific clause in the agreement that any dispute pertaining to the said agreement will be referred to the arbitrator for resolution of the dispute. As such, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. On merits, it is stated that complainant entered into an agreement bearing registration number U107098646 with the OP for purchase of land unit and deposited Rs.21120/- only as an advance land consideration. It is submitted that OP never gave assurance to the complainant that land advance consideration will be refunded after prescribed period.  It is also submitted that  CBI  has  freezed the bank account of the PACL Limited  for which OP has approached the Hon’ble High Delhi High Court against the arbitrary orders of the CBI which is pending  disposal before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. So, the OP  is helpless to make refund/ payment of its customer and such delay in refund of the complainant  is neither intentional nor deliberately.  Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

3.             The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-4 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OP has tendered document Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-2 and closed evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the OP has specifically argued that the complainant has not impleaded  the necessary parties  in the complaint, so the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. He has further argued that  there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the OP has not taken any objection in the written reply.

5.             We have gone through the documents and  affidavit Ex.OP-1 of the OP.  In the affidavit  Ex.OP-1, the OP has taken objection  that the complainant did not implead  the necessary parties in the complaint but the OP has not disclosed that what are the necessary parties which should be impleaded in the present complaint  by the complainant.

6.             From the perusal of the record we find that  complainant has filed the present complaint  against PACL India Limited, Opp. H.D.F.C. Bank, Near Goyal Laboratory Dhuri Gate, Sangrur its Manager.  The complainant has filed the present complaint only against the branch office, Sangrur through Branch Manager of PACL India Limited. The PACL India is a Limited  company  which can be sued  through its Chairman or Managing Director. The Branch Manager has no authority/ power to take decision  in the affairs of a limited company nor the Branch Manager is principal officer of the company. So, we  feel that the complainant has not properly sued the PACL India Limited having its Head Office at  22, 3^rd Floor, Amber Tower Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur. Moreover, the complainant has entered into an agreement with the PACL India Limited having its Head Office at Jaipur  and not with the branch office which is situated at Sangrur. Hence, in our view   no effective order can be passed against the branch office of OP unless the company can be sued through its Chairman/ Managing Director.

7.             So, in view of the above discussion, we feel that the present complaint against only branch office   through its Branch Manager is not maintainable  and accordingly same is dismissed. However, the complainant is at liberty to file fresh complaint after sueing the PACL India Limited  through its Chairman/ Managing Director  and other proper parties. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.     

Announced

                June 11, 2015

 

 

 ( Sarita Garg)          ( K.C.Sharma)           (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                      

Member                 Member                          President

 

 

BBS/-