DATE OF FILING : 22.03.2016.
DATE OF S/R : 10.05.2016.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 30.03.2017.
1. Anowra Begum,
wife of late Sk. Md. Illiyas,
residing at village Khardaha, P.O. Tulsiberia, P.S. Amta,
District Howrah.
2. Mina Begum,
wife of late Sk. Anisur Rahaman,
residing at village Khardaha, P.O. Tulsiberia, P.S. Amta,
District Howrah.
3. Asok Karar,
son of late Mangal Das Karar,
residing at village & P.O. Udang, P.s. Amta,
District Howrah.
4. Rebati Karar,
wife of Asok Karar,
residing at village & P.O. Udang, P.S. Amta,
District Howrah.
5. Ankita Karar,
daughter of Sri Asok Karar,
residing at village & P.O. Udang, P.S. Amta,
District Howrah.
6. Sk. Rajib,
son of late Sk. Mujit,
residing at village Tulsiberia, P.S. Uluberia,
District Howrah.
7. Sk Motiar Rahaman,
son of late Sk Asgar,
residing at village & P.O. Tulsiberia, P.S. Uluberia,
District Howrah.
8. Maniklal Karar,
son of late Kanailal Karar,
residing at village & P.O. Tulsiberia, P.S. Uluberia,
District Howrah.
9. Kabita Dalui,
wife of Mantu Dalui,
residing at village & P.O. Tulsiberia, P.S. Uluberia,
District Howrah.
10. Pradip Manna,
son of late Asto Manna,
residing at village & P.O. Tulsiberia, P.S. Uluberia,
District Howrah. …………….. ……………………………… COMPLAINANTS.
Rose Valley Hotels & Entertainments Ltd.,
having its registered office at Sector V,
Godrej Water Side,
office no. 201 & 202 Tower 1, 2nd floor,
Plot no. 5, Block DP, Salt Lake,
Kolkata 700091,
having its branch office at village + P.O. + P.S. Bagnan,
District Howrah,
PIN 711303. ………………………………………………………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
- This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioners, Anowra Begum and nine others praying for directing the o.p., Rose Valley Hotels & Entertainments Ltd., to pay the complainants their principal amount being the actual investment plus interest till realization or the maturity amount + interest till realization as applicable and to pay Rs. 30,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation costs.
- The case of the petitioners are that the petitioners are investors, who invested their money in fixed deposit and recurring deposit schemes of the o.p. company which is incorporated under the Company’s Act, 1956. The petitioner no. 1 invested in one fixed deposit scheme which will be matured on 07.10.2017 and six MISs which were matured in the year 2015 & 2016. The petitioner no. 2 invested Rs. 1,00,000/- in MIS which was matured on 07.02.2016 and two fixed deposit schemes with maturity dates 07.10.2017 & 07.10.2017. The petitioner no. 3 made investment in five MISs and the maturity dates are 26.11.2018, 30.11.2015, 07.12.2017, 18.9.2018 & 24.7. 2015 and eleven fixed deposit schemes and one recurring deposit scheme. The petitioner no. 4 made investment in two recurring deposit schemes, out of them one was matured on 24.7.2011 and the other was matured on 22.7.2016. The petitioner no. 5 invested in one MIS which was already matured on 22.7.2016. The petitioner no. 6 invested Rs. 20,000/- each in two F.D. schemes and the two certificates got matured on 28.3.2019 & 15.7.2018. The petitioner no. 7 invested Rs. 16,500/- in one recurring deposit scheme and the maturity date was 21.2.2015. The o.p. no. 8 invested in F.D. amounting to Rs. 10,000/- which was matured on 30.4.2015 and the maturity amount was Rs. 20,000/-. The o.p. no. 9 invested Rs. 12,000/- in recurring deposit scheme and the maturity date was 15.12.2014. The petitioner no. 10 invested in three fixed deposit schemes and one recurring deposit scheme. The petitioners stopped payment to the o.p. as they did not get any single furthering from the o.p. even after maturity date and also a question mark put on the o.p. regarding their status. When they approached the o.p. then they stated that due to unavoidable circumstances they are unable to pay the maturity benefits but they would make monthly installments from soon which they already stopped. So the petitioners filed this case praying for repayment of a sum of Rs. 18,44,732/- with interest plus payment of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation costs.
- The o.p. contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegations made against them and submitted that the case is not maintainable and the petitioner has no cause of action and they filed this case suppressing all material facts and also the case is barred by limitation. They further submitted that 2500 bank accounts of the company have been freezed by the Enforcement Directorate, Economic Offence Wing, resulting which the company is unable to make payment for discharging their liability. The Government of West Bengal also imposed an embargo on the company towards sale of its property. Further the company filed an application before the Hon’ble High Court to sell the assets and to pay the investors. In the instant case also the petitioners have not paid all the installments and did not pay the installments. Thus the policies being prematured, the petitioners cannot get the relief as prayed for and so the case be dismissed.
- Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
- Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether there is 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 :
- All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion and to skip off reiteration. In support of their case the petitioners filed affidavit as well as the certificates of all the petitioners showing the certificate number of the recurring deposit account and the date of commencement of the account and the number of installments paid in the account and the actual payment made and also the date of maturity and the maturity amount proving the fact that they purchased the certificates and went on depositing the installments. It is true that except the petitioner no. 1 the certificates of all other petitioners are not matured and also the petitioners after making partial payment stopped payment because maturity amount was not paid to them and the o.p. fleeing away from office dissatisfying the petitioners who got frustrated and realized that the o.p. took advantage and practiced unfair trade. There is no denial from the o.p. company that they have not received the installments from the petitioners and they have not issued the certificate even if all the policies are matured except 1. But the o.p. could not produce any document that the petitioners are not entitled to the deposited sum with interest as they stopped making payment. Rather the petitioners deposited their hard-earned money before the o.p. company and the turm-oil situation compelled the petitioner to stop payment as the o.p. company closed their offices and almost all the directors, managing directors are taken into custody by the Courts on the prayer of the Enforcement Directorate, Economic Offence Wing, as well as Central Bureau of Investigation.
In view of above discussion and findings thisforum finds there is sufficient evidence that the petitioners deposited their hard-earned money in the recurring deposit scheme of the o.p. company and they are entitled to get back their actual deposit amount with interest till realization in the case of the policies which are not yet matured and in the case where the policies are matured the petitioners are entitled to the maturity amount alsowith @ 9% p.a. interest till realization.
In the result, the application succeeds.
Court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. No. 120 of 2016 be and the same is allowed on contest with costs against the O.P.
The petitioners are entitled to the reliefs as prayed for and the O.P. company be directed to pay the principal amount + interest till realization @ 9% p.a. in the cases where the policies are not matured and in case of matured policy the petitioners are entitled to the maturity amount + interest @ 9% p.a. till realization within 30 days from the date of this order.
The petitioners are also entitled to compensation for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and the o.p. company is directed to pay the same within 30 days from the date of this order.
The o.p. company is further directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- out of which Rs. 10,000/- would go to the petitioners as litigation costs and rest Rs. 10,000/- would be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of this District Forum within 30 days from the date of this order.
The petitioners are at liberty to put the final order into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
