| ORDER | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA CC.No.437 of 19-10-2015 Decided on 11-03-2016 Shinder Pal aged about 52 years W/o Baldev Singh R/o Nanak Basti, Rampura Phul, Tehsil Phul, District Bathinda. ........Complainant Versus 1.PACL India Limited, Branch Office: S.C.F No.12 Near Bibiwala Chowk, Bathinda, through its Branch Manager/Responsible Person/Authorized Signatory. 2.PACL India Ltd. Corporate Office, 7th Floor, Gopal Das Bhawan, 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001, through its Managing Director/Responsible Person/Authorized Signatory/Director Gujant Singh Gill. 3.PACL India Ltd. Registered Office, 22, 3rd Floor, Amber Tower, Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur-302004, through its Managing Director/Authorized Signatory. .......Opposite parties Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 QUORUM Sh.M.P Singh Pahwa, President. Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member. Sh.Jarnail Singh, Member. Present:- For complainant: Sh.Bharat Bhushan, Advocate. Opposite parties: Ex-parte. ORDER Jarnail Singh, Member The complainant Shinder Pal (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against opposite parties PACL India Limited and Others (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties). Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that opposite party No.1 is the branch office and opposite party No.2 is the corporate office and opposite party No.3 is the registered office of PACL India Limited. She was approached by opposite parties and offered various investment schemes and assured about her safety of the hard earned money and also assured guaranteed high rate of interest on the deposited money. It is alleged that on assurance given by opposite parties, the complainant accepted the offer. It was agreed between the parties that the plan period is for 5 years 6 months and consideration value of the policy was fixed as Rs.15,000/- and as a security they shall register one plot of 300 sq. yards in her name and at the end of term (after 5 years and 6 months from the date of commencement of plan), she would have an option to take maturity amount of Rs.21,800/-. It was also condition of the agreement that the sale of the plot would be done after having receipt of 50% of the consideration amount of the plot and charges within the period of 270 days. The terms and conditions of the policy were not read over and explained to the complainant. The plan started on 19.12.2009 and policy document was issued to the complainant with registration No.U018167235. The date of deposit was completed on 27.6.2015 and maturity date of policy was 19.6.2015. She deposited all installments and thereafter she stopped paying installments. It is further alleged that after completion of the term i.e. 5 years 6 months, the complainant approached opposite parties and demanded her money, they asked her to deposit the original policy document and other receipts etc. with them. Accordingly, she deposited the said documents with them at Bathinda office i.e. opposite party No.1 on 27.6.2015, it issued her acknowledgment/maturity letter on 27.6.2015. She also deposited the signed stamp paper worth Rs.25/-, signed stamp etc. as demanded by opposite parties. They assured her that she would receive her money within 10 to 15 days. Despite repeated requests and personal visit to the office of opposite party No.1, no money was disbursed to her till date. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and has prayed for directions to them for payment of maturity amount of Rs.21,800/- alongwith interest @18% per annum and also claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.5500/-. Hence, this complaint. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through their Authorized Representative and contested the complaint by filing their written version. In their joint written version, they have pleaded that PACL Limited, having its registered office at 22, 3rd Floor, Amber Tower, Sansar Chand Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan and Corporate office at 7th Floor, Gopal Das Bhawan, 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi and is a corporate body incorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies Act. It has status of a legal persona, as such being a legal entity, it has right to sue for its own liability. It is Real Estate Company and engaged in the business of sale and purchase of land and development and construction of residential as well as commercial projects. It is further pleaded that in this case the complainant applied for a piece of land vide registration No.U018167235 dated 19.12.2009 and she has duly executed agreement with the company for same. This complaint is based on false and baseless averments. She has intentionally and willfully not disclosed the material facts. There is no deficiency on the part of opposite parties U/s 2(g) of 'Act'. Therefore, complaint is liable to be dismissed. No cause-of-action has arisen in favour of the complainant and against opposite parties to file this complaint. This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide this complaint. There is an arbitration clause in the agreement, which has been executed between the parties, according to which the parties should invoke arbitration proceedings for the redressal of their grievances in accordance with Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It is further pleaded that as per record, the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.15,480/- only with the company against sale consideration. CBI has registered a case against opposite parties vide R.C.BDI/2014/E/0004 U/s 420 and 120-B of IPC on 19.2.2014 and pursuant to the same it has passed directions to the concerned banks for freezing of their bank accounts. Opposite parties have filed a Writ Petition (Criminal) No.705/2014 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi against the direction of CBI for defreezing bank accounts. Vide order dated 6.5.2014, Hon'ble High Court allowed defreezing of the bank accounts. Thereafter CBI again freezed the bank accounts of company. The company has filed an application (Crl.M.A.No.12444/2014) in the aforesaid Writ Petition No.705/2014 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, which is still pending. The company is helpless to make payment to the complainant due to defreezing of the bank accounts by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Both the parties were afforded opportunities to produce evidence. In support of her claim, the complainant has tendered into evidence her own affidavit dated 11.10.2015, (Ex.C1) and photocopy of acknowledgment, (Ex.C2). Subsequently, none appeared on behalf of opposite parties. As such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against them. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and gone through the file carefully. Learned counsel for complainant has submitted that the complainant has invested an amount of Rs.15,480/- with opposite parties. This fact is admitted by opposite parties in their written version. Opposite parties in their written version have pleaded that they are unable to make refund/payment as the bank account is freezed by order of CBI. This fact also shows that opposite parties were to refund the amount received from the complainant. Of-course, expiry date of agreement was 19.6.2015. The complainant has deposited all the installments. Therefore, she is liable for maturity amount alongwith interest. At the most she can be given proportionate benefits and interest @ 18% per annum. We have given careful consideration to these submissions. As per opposite parties, the complainant has invested an amount of Rs.15,480/-. Of-course, it is alleged by opposite parties that they are in business of real estate, but there is nothing on record to show that any land was offered to the complainant by them. Expiry date of agreement was 19.6.2015. The complainant has deposited all the installments, but she has not brought on record any receipt in this regard. However, opposite parties have admitted that the complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.15,480/-. Therefore, she is entitled to maturity amount of the policy i.e. Rs.21,800/-. This fact is also not denied by opposite parties in their written version. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted with Rs.2500/- as cost and compensation against opposite parties. Opposite parties are directed to refund an amount of Rs.21,800/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum to the complainant from the date of maturity amount till payment. The compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record. Announced:- 11-03-2016 (M.P Singh Pahwa) President (Sukhwinder Kaur) Member (Jarnail Singh) Member
| |
