DATE OF DISPOSAL: 30.04.2024
PER: SRI SATISH KUMAR PANIGRAHI, PRESIDENT:
The fact of the case in brief is that the complainants have filed this Consumer complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties (in short O.P.) and for redressal of his grievance before this Commission.
2. The above named complainant P.Vijaya, depositor of monthly savings from her hard earnings for future requirements to meet the urgency, regularly paid the amount, as fixed and promises of above Opposite Party, long back. But the O.P. not released maturity of deposit amount in time to complainant even after several approaches with concerned local branch offices at Khalasi Street, Military line etc. After long protest, the O.P. assured and issued two new deposit renewal certificates in the name of above complainant for further extension period with huge benefits vide certificate No.(1) 573000097623 (2) No. 893000097617 even protested by complainant handed over on dated 09.07.2013 mentioning a sum of Rs.7,000/- each vide Hologram numbers 992136379851 and 992136379852 by authorized centre, Berhampur under sector and Regional office at Berhampur of above O.P. by taking old certificates and signatures and relative papers. The very act of the O.P. tantamount to deficiency in service, negligent, unfair trade practices of opposites party of this case, liable to pay entire matured amounts with interests, benefits as declared by O,.P. mentioned backside of certificates with small letters, no understand or visible to complainant. The above consumer disputes case is in time, continuation cause of action because the complainant in touch with concerned authorities of O.P. from the beginning to till date for their payments. Pending dues, and also the Supreme Court of India also directed to Opposite Party group of societies to pay the dues of deposits vide ordered dated 29.03.2023 for genuine depositors. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to settle the pending maturity amounts with all benefits promised to complainant as per O.Ps certificate of deposit interest until disposal of this case, compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation costs of Rs.5000/- in the best interests of justice.
3. The Commission condones the delay and admitted the case and issued notice to the O.P. It is found that the notice was returned to the Commission as per postal remark that, “Addressee unclaimed”.
4. On the date of hearing of the consumer complaint, the authorized representative for complainant is present. We heard argument from him for the complainant at length and perused the complaint petition, written argument and materials placed on the case record. It reveals that the complainant had deposited Rs.7000/- each on dated 09.07.2013vide Certificate No. 573000097623 and 893000097617 respectively, Berhampur sector, Berhampur. Though notice was sent by this Ld. District CDR Commission, Ganjam, Berhampur for appearance and filing written version by the O.P. but the O.P. did not avail the said opportunity. Hence, taking the materials on the case record as well as the sole testimony of the complainant into consideration, we hold that the O.Ps are negligent in rendering proper service to the complainant as such we hold that there is deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. Further Law is well settled in case of Mrs. Puneet Kaur versus Hindustan Financial Management Ltd. and others reported in 2003(1) CPR 274 where in the Hon’ble National CDR Commission, New Delhi has held that “Non-payment of fixed deposit amount on its maturity by Financial Institution constitutes deficiency in service”. In another case when a company or a firm invites deposits on promise of attractive rates of interest and prompt repayment of principal and interest on the expiry of the stipulated period with full security for the investment in the shape of the assets of the company or firm, it is in essence of an offer by the company providing to interested persons a safe avenue for investment of their fund with an assurance of prompt repayment and full security of investment. The consideration for the arrangement consists of the fact that the company or firm is enabled to use the funds deposited with it for the purposes of its business. Such a transaction is clearly one of providing service for consideration and depositor is clearly a consumer under the Act. The Opposite Party was directed to repay the guaranteed value of the deposits with interests @ 12% per annum till payment and to pay the cost- Shanker Lal Rathi Versus Neha Leasing & Holdings ltd. 1996 (2) CPR 90.
Moreover in another case the Hon’ble National Consumer Commission held in Adelkar Prathibha B. (Mrs.) & Ors V. Shivaji Estate Livestock and Farms Pvt. Ltd. & Ors reported in II (2015) CPJ 221 (NC) that “Complainant hired or availed services of O.P. for investing their savings in schemes floated by O.P. and deposited money with it for investing on their behalf in Goat Farming and allied activities- Complainant are consumers, Remedy before Consumer Forum is primarily a civil remedy - Complaint maintainable. Failure on parts of financial establishment to honour its commitment - Deficiency in service – Unfair trade practices - OP is directed to refund the investment made by complainant in scheme floated by it”.
5. On foregoing discussion and in view of the clear position of law the complainant’s case is partly allowed on exparte against the O.P as not provided the benefits as mentioned in the certificates. The Opposite Party is directed to pay the contribution amount of Rs.14,000/- only along with 9% interest per annum from the date of deposit i.e. 09.07.2013 to the complainant within 45 days from receipt of this order. Further the O.P. is also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation to the complainant within the above stipulated period failing which all the dues shall carry 12% interest per annum till its actual date of realization from the date of filing of this case i.e. on 21.09.2023 and the complainant is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for realization of all dues.
This case is disposed of accordingly.
The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.
A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 or they may download same from the www.confonet.nic.in to treat the same as if copy of the order received from this Commission.
The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.
Pronounced on 30.04.2024.
