Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/23/162

Tribhuvan Rai - Complainant(s)

Versus

Saharayn Universal Mult. Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Manoj Lekhi

04 Apr 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No:  162 dated 19.04.2023.                                                       Date of decision: 04.04.2024. 

 

Tribhuvan Rai S/o. Ram Milan Rai, R/o. H. No.9449/2, Ward No.5, Street No.5, Chander Lok Colony, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana, Punjab-141007.      Mob. No.9478625334.                                                                                                                                                                                ..…Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Regd. Office: # 195, Zone 1, In Front of D.B. Mall, M.P. Nagar, Bhoal, Madhya Pradesh-462011, through its Director/M.D./C.E.O.
2. Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Kailash Chowk, Ludhiana, through its Manager/Authorized Signatory.
3. Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Opposite Grand Marian Hotel, Dugri Road, Ludhiana, through its Manager/Authorized Signatory.   
4. Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Bal Tower, 2^nd Floor, Near Dada Motor, G.T. Delhi Road, District Ludhiana, through its Manager/Authorized Signatory.                                                                                                                                           …..Opposite parties 

Complaint Under Section 35 and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

QUORUM:

SH. SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

SH. MONIKA BHAGAT, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh. Manoj Lekhi, Advocate.

For OP1                         :         Exparte.

For OP2 to OP4             :         None. (Right of the OP2 to OP4 to file written                                             statement already extinguished vide order dated                                           02.02.2024)                  

ORDER

PER MONIKA BHAGAT, MEMBER

 

1.                Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on the inducement of officials of the opposite parties of handsome return and timely payment, the complainant availed plan in the shape of FDR from the OPs, the details of which is reproduced as under:-

i.  Receipt No.34017888120, Certificate No.795-001254702, Membership No.969876001332 dated 30.09.2016 for Rs.1,00,000/- in STAR TWO plan.

 

The complainant approached and requested the opposite parties to encash the above said FDR but they kept the matter dilly delayed on false pretext. Due to non-encashment of FDRs amount by the opposite parties, the complainant has suffered mental pain, agony and harassment etc. Therefore, the complainant filed the present complaint asserting that the act and conduct of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and further prayed for making payment of proceeds of the said FDRs and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of mental agony, harassment and distress. The complainant also claimed litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/-.

2.                Notice to opposite party No.1 sent through registered post was received with report of refusal and as such, opposite party No.1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 18.07.2023.

3.                Upon notice, Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate appeared and filed power of memo of opposite parties No.2 to OP4 but thereafter, failed to file regular power of attorney along with written statement affidavit and documents despite grant of sufficient opportunity and as such, the right of opposite parties No.2 to OP4 to file written statement already extinguished vide order dated 02.02.2024.

3.                In evidence, the complainant tendered his affidavit as Ex. CA and reiterated his averments of the complaint. The complainant also placed on record Ex. C1 is the copy of certificate No. 795001254702, Ex. C2 is the copy of Aadhar Card of the complainant and closed the evidence.

4.                We have heard the counsel for the complainant and also gone through the complaint, affidavit and documents annexed by the complainant.

5.                In his affidavit Ex. CA, the complainant has reiterated the entire case as set forth in the complaint. The complainant has further proved on record the copy of certificate Ex. C1 vide which the complainant deposited Rs.1,00,000/- on 30.09.2016. Though the evidence has gone unrebutted on the file, the certificate Ex. C1 reveals that the complainant deposited Rs.1,00,000/- on 30.09.2016 with the opposite parties. However, the date of maturity and the amount of maturity has not been mentioned on these certificates. Even rate of interest has also not been mentioned on this certificate. In these circumstances, it would be just and proper if the opposite parties are directed to refund the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited through certificate Ex. C1 along with interest @8% from 30.09.2016 till date of actual payment along with composite costs of Rs.10,000/-.

6.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with an order that the opposite parties shall be jointly and severally liable to refund the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited through certificate Ex. C1 along with interest @8% from 30.09.2016 till date of actual payment to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. The opposite parties shall further pay a composite compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the complainant. Compliance of order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

 

(Monika Bhagat)                              (Sanjeev Batra)               Member                                         President  

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:04.04.2024.

Gobind Ram.