Samaresh Kumar Mitra, Presiding Member.
This case has been filed U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant that the opposite party company is a unit of Sahara India Pariwar who has vain overview to show publicity that it owns and operates consumer merchandise retail stores in India whiles it uses to raise investment policies and collects investments from the public investors through the issuance of certificate and the opposite party no. 2, 3 and 4 are the directors and principal officers of the opposite party company and responsible to the opposite party no. 1 for its day to day business and they also enjoyed the overall control over the regular affairs of the said opposite party company during the material times and all of them jointly and/ or severally made the transactions with the complainant representing the opposite party no. 1 and the opposite party no. 5 is a Sector Manager for the specified Service Centre at Rishra, under the opposite party company at the address as mentioned in the cause title and the opposite party no. 5 provides leadership, direction and guidance to the directors, managers and agents of the opposite party company within the assigned sector of Rishra to ensure proper execution of their investment policies and collection of funds from the respective investors for and on behalf of the opposite party nos. 1 to 4 and the opposite party no. 6 is an agent of the opposite party company who played exclusive role in order to deceive the complainant and time to time induced him for fulfilling the unlawful goals of the opposite parties and in January 2010 was allured and captivated by the opposite parties to make her savings invested with principle amount of Rs. 20,000.00/- vide receipt no. 161510302760, control no. 16153500203 at Rishra Sector Office in their subsidiary group company of Sahara India Pariwar i.e. Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited (herein after referred to as ‘defaulter company’) in ‘Housing Bonds’ Scheme for getting lucrative returns and after the said investment in the said scheme of Sahara Pariwar as stated above, meanwhile in September 2012 the complainant further induced by the opposite parties through their agent herein opposite party no. 6 to switch over her investment to a new scheme in their another group company i.e. ‘Q Shop Plan- H’ in Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited herein opposite party no. 1 and the complainant being decoyed with their deceptive representations went ahead with the same and converted said Housing Bond which was for the period of 15 years and since the said Housing Bond was going to be reinvested in another scheme before the end of the term, the said defaulter company allowed a premature interest of Rs. 8,000.00/- for the period of 32months in the said Housing Bond and as such on 7.9.2012 an amount of Rs. 28,000.00/- was reinvested to ‘Q Shop Plan – H’ in Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited herein the opposite party no. 1 at Rishra Sector Office for the period of 72 months (6 years) and in pursuant to the said Bond/ Certificate being Certificate no. 562005344198, Receipt no. 71019127765 dt. 7.9.2012 was issued and handed over to the complainant and at the time of investment in said ‘Q Shop Plan – H’ it was assured that the complainant would get LBP benefit 2.35 times of Global Advance (deposited amount) i.e. Rs. 65,800.00/- (apex) at the time of maturity i.e. 7.9.2018 and after the said investment in opposite party no. 1 the complainant was looking for the best returns but she was shocked when after the maturity period of said investment the opposite parties are purposely denying to return her deposits whilst on the other they are further over-persuading the complainant to reinvest her maturity value in their another scheme.
The complainant also states that on 9.11.2018 the complainant submitted a letter to the opposite party no. 5 with a request to release the maturity value of deposited amount but the opposite parties did not pay any heed to the same and on several occasions the complainant as well as her brother made attempts over phone, Whatsapp and also personally visited to the Rishra Sector Office of the opposite parties as mentioned in the cause title and requested their concerned dealing person and agent to resolve the issues forasmuch the old ailing parents of the complainant were suffering from acute diseases particularly with pacemaker implantation to her mother whilst the complainant was going to be married very soon i.e. in February 2019 but the officials as well as said agent of opposite party no. 1 deliberately brushed her off with evasive reply without resolving the issue and the complainant tried to move from heaven and earth but the opposite parties were deceptively putting out of sight the complainant with an intention to grab the invested amount and switching over her earlier investment policy to a new one was come later to the in knowledge of complainant that said defaulter company of Sahara India Pariwar i.e. Sahara Investment Corporation Limited (SHICL) in which the complainant had initially invested Rs. 20,000.00/- in January, 2010 has violated the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, SEBI Act, 1992, erstwhile SEBI (Disclosure and Investor Protection) Guidelines, 2000 and SEBI (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2009 which led to finally disposal of a Civil Appeal no. 9813 of 2011 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and in the said case SEBI was authorized to take all legal recourse including attachment and sale of properties, freezing of bank accounts etc. against Saharas for realizations of the amounts unduly collected under the prospectus and to refund the same to all such investors with interest and the opposite parties aided and assisted the defaulter company in escaping from compliance of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order and also from refunding the amount to the duped investors and while on the other hand now they are trying to misappropriate the investment of the complainant and very recently the opposite parties disappeared from their respective addresses of sector office and all the opposite parties have pulled together in the same trends of business and services whereby the complainant has been duped and ensnared by the deceitful presentation of the opposite parties and finding no other alternative the complainant send a legal notice dt. 2.9.2019 through her ld. Advocate to the opposite parties through Regd. Post with acknowledgement due card at their address and called upon them to reply the same but they neither replied nor taken any action as required in the aforesaid notice even they failed to rebut the contentions in the said notice till the filing of this case and the notice upon the opposite parties has been duly served on 5.9.2019 and 6.9.2019 except opposite party no. 5 who has dislocated from their respective sector office address and the cause of action arose on 7.9.2018 when the Bond/ Certificate was matured and the same is still unpaid, payable by the opposite parties and subsequently on 9.11.2018 when the opposite party no. 5 was requested to release the maturity amount and on 2.9.2019 when notice to the opposite parties was served through ld. Advocate of the complainant and the same is continuing.
Complainant filed the complaint petition praying direction upon the opposite parties to pay sum of Rs. 65,800.00 and to pay a sum of Rs. Rs. 2,00,000.00/- due to concealment, mislead, craftily collection of fund by issuing Bond/ certificate, inducement to switch over in a new plan, surreptitiously aided and assisted the defaulter company in escaping from compliance of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order and also from refunding the amount to the duped investors and cheat the SEBI, denying to pay maturity amount, misrepresentation and embezzlement etc and Rs. 1,00,000.00/- for harassment, mental agony and to pay interest @ 15% on maturity value i.e. Rs. 10,690.00/- for the period from September 2018 to September 2019 and so on till realization of actual payment and to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000.00/- for litigation cost.
The complainant filed evidence on affidavit which is nothing but replica of complaint petition and supports the averments of the complainant in the complaint petition.
Complainant filed written notes of argument. The evidence on affidavit and written notes of argument of complainant are taken into consideration for passing final order.
Argument as advanced by the agent of the complainant heard in full.
From the discussion herein above, we find the following issues/points for consideration.
Issues/points for consideration
- Whether the complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties or not?
- Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief or not?
DECISIONS WITH REASONS
All the points are taken together for easiness of the discussions of this case.
- In the light of the discussion hereinabove and from the materials on record, it transpires that the complainant is a Consumer as provided by the spirit of Section 2 (1) (d) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complainant here in is a consumer of the opposite parties.
- Both the complainant and the opposite parties are residents/having their office addresses within the district of Hooghly. For mental agony and other expenses which is within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.
- The complainant in his written notes of argument averred that in January, 2010 complainant initially invested Rs.20,000/- for the period of 15 years in Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Ltd. In its housing bond plan being receipt no. 161510302760 dt. 11.01.2010 subsequently on the voice of the opposites party the said housing bond was switched over and reinvested before its maturity to another subsidiary company of Sahara India Pariwar i.e. In Sahara Q Shop Unique products range Ltd. herein opposite party no. 1 in its Q shop plan- H for the period of 72 months with a principal amount of Rs.28,000/-(Rs.20,000/-+Rs.8,000/-) premature interest for 32 months in the said housing loan vide certificate no. 562005344198 dt. 7.9.2012. At the time of investment in Q shop plan – H it was assured that the complainant will get LBP benefit 2.35 time of global advance i.e. Rs.65,800/- at the time of maturity on 7.9.2018. Since after the maturity period inspite of several requests and intimations the opposite parties deliberately denied to return the deposits of the complainant. The earlier subsidiary company of Sahara India Pariwar i.e. Sahara Housing Investment corporation Ltd. in which the complainant initially invested in January,2010 as violated the related loss which lead to make directions by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil appeal no. 9813 of 2011 with authorization of SEBI to take all legal reports including attachment and sale of properties, freezing of bank accounts etc against Saharas for realization of amounts unduly collected under the prospectus and to refund the same to all such investees with interest. According to the complainant, the opposite parties are squarely liable for concealment, mislead, craftily collection of funds by issuing bond/ certificate, inducement to switch over in a new plan, surreptitiously added and assisted the earlier company in escaping from compliance of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order dt. 31.08.2012 and also from refunding the amount to the duped investors and cheat the SEBI denying to pay maturity amount, misrepresentation and embezzlement etc. The complainant assailed that he was deprived of getting the maturity amount during the period of urgency like marriage and implantation of pace-maker to her old ailing mother for which she suffered a lot. The allegations of the complaint is unchallenged one as the opposite party failed to file their written version/ written objection by appearing in this complaint case. So this commission compelled to hear argument ex-parte against them.
After perusing the photocopy of documents of Sahara Housing Investment corporation ltd. being receipt no. 161510302760 the name of the investor is Mamta Kumari Singh is the holder of 20 optionally fully convertible paid up housing bonds of Rs.1000/- each in the above named company and the redemption value has been fixed Rs.1,26,000/-. Another document of Sahara Q shop unique products range Ltd. being receipt no. 71019127765 in the name of Mamta Kumari Singh, investment amount Rs.28,000/- dt. 7.9.2012 for the period as per the terms and conditions of the plan. Total accumulated LBF benefit will be 2.13/2.26/2.35/3.84/2.97/4.06 times of Global Advance and it is based on certain/ specific consumption pattern of Q shop plan– H, goods and or hospitality product.
The letter dt. 9.11.2018 of the complainant to Section Manager, Sahara India Pariwar, Rishra Branch, Dist.- Hooghly in which the complainant stated that on 7.9.2012 she deposited an amount of Rs.28,000/- in Q shop plain – H for the period of 72 months which has been matured on 7.9.2018. She wants to withdraw that and contacted authorized representative Mr. Jitendra Sinha for the payment procedure but he said that the company is unable to pay the maturity amount right now. The representative also introduced her to reinvest the maturity amount in any other schemes of the opposite party. As her parents were suffering from acute diseases so she requested to release payment as early as possible. The said letter filed on 9.11.2018 before the opposite party. Subsequently, the complainant served Advocate letter dt. 2.9.2019 to opposite party nos. 1 to 6 stating everything with a request to disburse the matured amount in default the complainant will compel to take necessary legal action against them for negligence, deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and restrictive trade practice. Despite receiving the legal notice as well as the letter from the end of the complainant the opposite party did not pay heed at the utterance of the complainant. So, the complainant filed the instant complaint petition praying directions upon the opposite party as incorporated in the prayer portion of the complaint petition.
The documents of investment are produced in Xerox copies. The receipts/certificates are signed by the Director/ Authorised Signatory of the opposite party. So we may presume that the opposite party accepted those invested amounts of the complainants. The complainants by filing evidence on affidavit demanded that they did not receive the matured amount till date and as the opposite party did not meet the demand of the complainant so this complainant getting no alternative filed the instant complaint for getting matured amounts including interest, compensation & cost. This complainant after the expiry of the period as fixed earlier approached the opposite party for getting the matured sum but the opposite party did not show good gesture upon the complainant by paying the matured amounts. As such the opposite party is deficient in providing service to this complainant and they are also in the charge of unfair trade practice. So the demand of the complainant is valid, cogent and at per but not excessive or exorbitant.
Upon perusing the case the decision and hearing the Ld. Advocates this Forum is in the opinion that the complainant case is rightly filed before this Forum under the section of Consumer Protection Act,1986 as the section 3 of the act clearly mentioned that the provisions of this act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other Law for the time being in force. So the complaint petition is deserved to be allowed with cost and compensation. The complainant proved her case by adducing evidence and the opposite parties are deficient in providing service to this complainant and the opposite parties are in the charge of unfair trade practice. So the complainant is entitled to get maturity benefits, including interest @ 10% per annum since the date of maturity till the realization with a litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- from the opposite party within a period of 45 days from the date of passing this order.
The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainant has abled to prove her case. As such the Opposite Party is liable to pay compensation to this Complainant as we deem fit and proper.
As it is already proved in the discussion, the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the Opposite Party cannot be ousted and as such the Complainant is entitled to get relief(s).
-
Hence it is ordered that the complaint case being no. CC 162/2019 be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the Opposite Party No. 1 to 4 with a litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to this complainant.
The Opposite party No. 1 to 4 is hereby directed to pay the matured amount plus maturity benefit to this complainant as per her investments, including interest @ 10% since the date of maturity till date of realization and compensation of Rs.40,000/- for mental pain & agony to this complainant within 45 days from the date of passing this final order.
Opposite Party No 5 & 6 are exonerated from this proceeding.
The Opposite Party 1 to 4 is further directed to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- in the Consumer Legal Aid Account for unfair trade practice within 45 days from the date of passing this final order.
At the event of failure to comply with the order the Opposite Party 1 to 4 shall pay fine @Rs.50/- for each day’s delay, if caused, on expiry of the aforesaid 45 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any, in the Consumer Legal Aid Account.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied, free of cost, to the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgement/ be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
