OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANGUL
PRESENT:- SRI DURGA CHARAN MISHRA.
PRESIDENT
A N D
Sri K.K.Mohanty, MEMBER.
Consumer Complaint No. 102 of 2013
Date of Filling : - 16.12.2013.
Date of Order :- 28.03.2019.
Miss Bhabani Raul,D/O.- Aruna Prasad Raul,
C/O.- Sri Uma Charan Pradhan,At/P.O-Turanga,
P.S/S.D/Dist.Angul.
______________________________________________Complainant.
Vrs.
- Surya Narayan Mishra,Angul–BDA,
UTI Mutual Fund,First Floor,Sriram
Market Complex,At-Similipada,
P.O/P.S/Dist.-Angul-759122
- Zonal Manager,Unit Trust of India,
UTI Tower,‘Gn’ Block,Bandra(East), Mumbai-400051
______________________________________________Opp. parties.
For the complainant :- Sri P.Sahu & associates(Advs.).
For the opp.party No.1 :- Self.
For the opp.party No.2 :- Sri S.K.Biswal & associates(Advs.)
: J U D G E M E N T :
Sri K.K.Mohanty,Member.
The petitioner has filed this case with prayer to direct the opp. parties to pay the maturity amount of Rs. 1,05,000.00 along with 24% quarterly compoundable interest of unit certificate No. R9320227016235 to the petitioner on the grounds stated there in.
2. Briefly stated the petitioner’s case runs thus:-
That, the petitioner’s grandfather had purchased some units from the opp. parties which was purely investment in RAJALAXMI UNITS SCHEME. The date of investment was on 15.2.1993 and the date of maturity was on 15.2.2013.The contract maturity amount was Rs.1,05,000.00 vide certificate No. R9320227016235.
It is alleged by the petitioner that during term end when she applied for maturity amount the opp. parties did not respond to their request and after a pleader notice from the petitioner on 13.05.2013 the opp. parties replied that “rus92” stands terminated with effect from 30.09.2000. Over all the maturity value of Rs. 15,990.23 is permissible up to 30.09.2000.The petitioner was astonished how the opp. parties terminated the contract without her consent. Being harassed by the opp. parties action the petitioner has moved this forum for justice.
3. The opp. parties have contested the case with a plea that the scheme was functional upto 30.09.2000 .Before that date opp. parties have intimated to all investors (unit holders) regarding termination of this scheme contract dtd.10.8.2000.The opp. parties vehemently opposed the allegations of the complainant and prayed for dismissal of the case.
3. Out of the rival pleadings of the parties the following issues arise for consideration :-
Issues:-
- Whether the case is maintainable or not ?
- Whether there is cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether the case is barred by law of limitation ?
- Whether consumer and service provider relationship exists between the parties or not ?
- Whether as per the policy scheme No. RUS 92 the opp. parties are bound to give the matured amount or they can change it ?
- Whether the opp. parties have committed any deficit in rendering service to the petitioner ?
- To what other reliefs the parties are entitled to ?
: F I N D IN G S :
Issue No.(i),(ii) & (iii):-The complainant’s grand father had deposited money at Angul UTI office and the claim is within Rs. 20,000,00.00 , so the case is maintainable before this forum.
Rs. 5,000.00 was deposited for complainant under RUS 92 (Rajalaxmi Scheme) with contract to get maturity amount of Rs. 1,05,000.00 but the opp. parties did not give the amount. So the complainant has very good cause of action to file the case.
It appears that this case is not barred by law of limitations or any other law.
Issue No.(iv):-The complainant ‘s grand father had deposited money with the opp. parties to get the maturity amount and the opp. parties are bound to comply it .Thus there is consumer and service provider relationship between them.
Issue No.(v) & (vi) :-The complainant has deposited Rs. 5,000.00 on 15.02.93 with the opp. parties under RUS 92 scheme (Rajalaxmi) with assurance/guarantee to get maturity amount of Rs. 1,05,000.00 on 15.02.2013 . According to the opp. parties they terminated this contract in the year 2000 and published the matter in Govt. Gazette for information of all concern including the complainant but by this the opp. parties cannot be absolved from their liability. The transaction between the complainant and the opp. parties was complete when the complainant’s grand father deposited the money and the opp. parties received the money and issued bond. This is a valid contract and it can only be terminated by consent of both the parties. In the present case the complainant has not given consent for premature redemption of his policy .The opp. parties have failed to prove any documentary or cogent evidence to justify that they had approached the complainant for premature closer or change of the policy. The complainant has fully denied her knowledge about premature closure of this policy.
In the above premises the premature closer ofpolicy of the complainant without valid intimation or consent is bad, illegal and against principles of natural justice. So the complainant is entitled to get the maturity amount ofher policy and the opp. party company shall pay it and by not paying of the matured amount the opp.parties have committed gross deficit in rendering service.
Issue No.(vii):- In view of the discussions made above in issue No. v & vi the complainant is entitled to get the maturity amount of Rs. 1,05,000.00 only along with Bank rate of interest and cost of litigation.
Opp. party No.1 is the service holder/ agent under opp. party No.2 and admittedly opp. party No.2 has received the deposited amount. Therefore opp. party No.1 cannot be held liable in this case and the whole liability lies with opp. party No.2 company.
- Hence the order.
: O R D E R :
The case is disposed of on contest against opp. party No.1 & 2. Opp. party No.1 is not at all liable in this case. Opp. party No.2 is directed to pay the maturity amount of Rs. 1,05,000.00 (Rupees One Lakh Five Thousand) only to the complainant within 45(Forty-Five) days of getting this order along with 7% yearly compoundable interest on the maturity amount from the date of filing of this case i.e from 16.12.2013 till actual payment is made. The opp. party No.2 shall also pay Rs. 5000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand) to the complainant towards cost of litigation. It is made clear that in case of any deviation of this order by opp. party No2,then it shall give 12% quarterly compoundable interest on the maturity amount of Rs. 1,05,000.00(Rupees One Lakh Five thousand) and accrued interest at the rate of 7% from 16.12.2013 and on litigation cost of Rs. 5,000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand) from the 46th day of this order .
Order delivered in the open forum today the 28th March,2019 with hand and seal of this Forum.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me Sd/-
(Sri D. C. Mishra)
Sd/- President.
(Sri K.K.Mohanty )
Member.
