Order by:

Smt.Priti Malhotra, President

1.           The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that the Opposite Party is a Financial Corporation and it used to get deposit the amount from various consumers through different schemes on interest basis in the shape of bonds or otherwise. On the allurement of officials of Opposite Party, the complainant deposited his hard earned money with Opposite Party in the shape of Unsecured Non-Convertible Bond amounting to Rs.5,00,000/- i.e. five bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- each on 01.04.2013 and the said amount of bonds was to be returned to the complainant annually i.e. on 31^st of March of every year alongwith interest @ 7.85%. Initially, the Opposite Party repaid the amount of interest regularly for two years. But now the amount of Rs.3 lakh remains due towards the Opposite Party as on 31.03.2015. Further alleged that initially the Opposite Party deducted TDS on the interest amount. After that the Opposite Party stopped to repay the interest amount. In this way, as on 31.10.2022 the Opposite Party has to repay the amount of 3 bonds alongwith interest @ 7.85% per annum. Further alleged that as per terms and conditions of the bonds, the amount of bonds was to be repaid as on 31^st March of every year, but the Opposite Party has stopped to repay the amount of interest and also failed to return the entire amount of bonds and accordingly as on 31.10.2022 the amount payable to the complainant comes to Rs.5,35,815.94 paisa. Repeated requests have been made by the complainant to the Opposite Party to make the deposited amount alongwith agreed rate of interest and no indulge the complainant into any litigation, but the Opposite Party refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant. Hence this complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-

a)       Opposite party may be directed to make the payment of Rs.5,35,815.94 paisa alongwith future interest @ 18% per annum from 01.11.2022 till its actual realization.

b)      To pay an amount of R.2,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension, harassment and agony.

c)       To pay an amount of Rs.33,000/- as cost of the complaint.

d)      And any other relief which this Commission may deem fit and proper be granted to the complainant in the interest of justice and equity.

2.       Opposite Party appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present complaint is barred by non-joinder of necessary parties and same deserves to be dismissed. The alleged bonds were issued in pursuance of section 7 sub section (1) of State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 and guaranteed by the State Government; the present complaint is not maintainable against the Opposite Party in the facts and circumstances as explained by the complainant; neither the complainant is consumer nor the disputes raised by the complainant is a consumer dispute with the answering Opposite Party; no cause of action has been accrued to the complainant for filling present complaint against the answering Opposite Party; at present the complaint has become in fructuous as the answering Opposite Party already released a cheque no.121719 dated 12.12.2022 for Rs.3,25,679/- drawn on PNB, Chandigarh vide letter No.PFC/Acctts/2022-23/2252 dated 13.12.22 in favour of the complainant. The said cheque has been realized in favour of the complainant on 20.12.2022. On merits, it is admitted that non convertible bonds amounting to Rs.5 lakhs were issued to the complainant and the said amount of bonds was to be returned to the complainant annually on 1^st of June every year alongwith interest @ 7.85% and not on 31^st March of every year as claimed by the complainant. All other allegations made in the complaint are denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint is made.

3.       Complainant also filed replication to the written reply of Opposite Party denying the objections raised by it in its written reply.

4.       In order to prove his case, complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C9.

5.       To rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Party tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Kashmir Singh, District Manager, Punjab Financial Corporation Ex.OP1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP4.

6.       We have heard the counsel for the complainant and gone through the documents placed on record.

7.       The complainant deposited Rs.5,00,000/- in the shape of Unsecured Non-Convertible bond i.e. five bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- each with the Opposite Party on 01.04.2013 is not disputed. The said amount was to be returned by the Opposite Party to the complainant annually with interest @ 7.85% is also not disputed. The plea of the complainant is that he has received the payment with interest for first two years, but thereafter Opposite Party failed to pay the amount with interest for the remaining three years.

8.       From the record as well as from the submission made by the ld. counsel for the parties and the arguments submitted, it is clear that after filing of the present complaint, the Opposite Party initiated their process for the payment of three bonds in question alongwith interest accrued thereon. Though, the complainant has not placed on record copies of the bonds in question for the reasons best know to him, but from the pleadings of the parties, it is evident that the maturity date of the bond was 31^st of every year and the Opposite Party certainly and evidently failed to pay the same on stipulated date which tantamount not only to deficient service, but also reflects unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party.

9.       Now, the moot question is left to be decided with regard to the interest to be paid on the maturity amount. Since, the complainant has not placed on record copies of the bonds in question, so it is hard to grant the interest at the similar rate which was fixed by the Opposite Party in the bonds in question. In the absence of any terms and conditions regarding factum of interest to be paid by the Opposite Party when there is a failure to repay on the stipulated date of the bonds in question, we are unable to grant the same. In the given scenario, we feel that the complainant is entitled for the saving rate of interest which was due as per maturity date of bonds in question.

10.     In view of discussion above, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and directed the Opposite Party to pay the interest as per saving rate of interest from the date of respective maturity of the bonds in question till its actual realization . Further Opposite Party is burdened with compository cost of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to be paid to the complainant for deficiency in service and resorting to unfair trade practice. Compliance of the order be made by the Opposite Party within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which, the Opposite Party is further burdened with Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand only) to be paid to the complainant for non compliance of the order. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room.

Announced on Open Commission