Complaint filed on: 06-01-2017                                                      Disposed on: 01-09-2017

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM

OLD DC OFFICE COMPOUND, TUMAKURU-572 101

CC.No.02/2017

DATED THIS THE 1^st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017

PRESENT

SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K. BAL, LLM, PRESIDENT

SMT.GIRIJA, B.A., LADY MEMBER

Complainant: -           

Ms.Yashoda Ramamurthy,

D/o. Prof. V.Ramamurthy,

Aged about 45 years,

Hirehalli post, Tumakuru taluk

Karnataka

(In-person)

V/s

Opposite parties:-    

1.Shri.Manoj Gaur,

Chairman, Jaypee Infratech

Limited, Sector 128, Noida-201304, UP

2.M/s. Link Intime India Pvt. Ltd.

(Registrar to the Fixed Deposit Scheme Jaypee Infratech Ltd),

C-13, Pannalal silk mills compound, LBS Marg, Bhandup (West), Mumbai

3.The Superintendent of Posts, Tumakuru division,

4.Gandhinagar, Tumakuru

(OP No.1 – In-person)

(OP No.2- Exparte)

(OP N0.3-H.S.Raju)

ORDER

SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K. PRESIDENT

This complaint is filed by the complainant against the OP No.1 to 3, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The complainant prays to direct the OPs to repay the deposit amount of Rs.50,000=00 and penal interest @ 20% compounded monthly and to pay Rs.1,000=00  towards costs and to pay Rs.10,000=00 towards financial hardship and mental agony over a period of two years, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The brief facts of the complaint is as under.

          The complainant submitted that, she had deposited an amount of Rs.50,000=00 to the OPs company for three years under the Cumulative Fixed Deposit Scheme on 17-11-2011  and it was matured on 17-11-2014.

The complainant further submitted that, the OPs have sent a cheque for the cumulative interest to the complainant in Nov.2014, but not for the deposited amount.

The complainant further submitted that, on 20-12-2014 the OPs have sent an Axis Bank Cheque No.039276 dated 17-11-2014 for Rs.50,000=00 by speed post to the complainant, but she did not receive the speed post envelope containing the above said cheque, because the postal authority had lost the envelop cover during the transit. The postal department had offered to pay compensation to the OPs for the loss of speed post envelop cover in the first week of April 2015.

The complainant further submitted that, during the 13 months, the complainant wrote 12 letters to the OPs requesting them to send a valid cheque for the deposit amount of Rs.50,000=00 together with interest @ 12.5% for the delayed period.  In this regard, the complainant had approached the OPs through telephone and the OPs have informed that, they had sent an Axis Bank Cheque No.039276 dated 17-11-2014 for Rs.50,000=00 deposited amount by speed post from Bhandup post office, Mumbai on 20-12-2014 in envelope No.EM002989694IN. But the complainant did not receive the speed post from the 3^rd OP post office not valid cheque from the OP No.1 and 2 till today. Hence, the complainant was left with no other option, she has approached this Forum to get back the deposited amount of Rs.50,000=00 along with interest from the OPs. Hence, the present complaint is filed.     

3. In response to the Forum notice, the OP No.1 has sent a version through courier to this forum. The OP No.2 has not appeared before the forum and he has called out absent and he have been placed exparte. The OP No.3 has appeared through his counsel and filed objection. 

4. In the objection, the 1^st OP submitted that, in respect of FDR No.21528 having maturity date 16-11-2014 the 1^st OP has paid the principal amount vide cheque bearing MICR No.39276 dated 17-11-2014 of Rs.50,000=00 which was dispatched through speed post bearing Receipt no.EM002989684IN dated 20-12-2014. The 1^st OP had also sent maturity interest amount of Rs.22,610=00 which was repaid vide cheque bearing MICR No.116235 dispatched through speed post bearing receipt no.EM236276555IN dated 1-11-2014 and the same was encashed by the complainant  on 17-11-2014.

The 1^st OP further submitted that, the complainant had received all the cheques and encashed the same except cheque No.39278 for the repayment of principal amount of Rs.50,000=00 against the FDR No.21528 was not received by the complainant.  The complainant approached to the postal department for intensive on this matter. Subsequently the same cheque was claimed to be lost in transit by the postal department.

Thereafter considering the inconvenience and difficulties faced by the complainant in receiving the aforesaid principal amount against the FRD No.21528, the 1^st OP has reissued another cheque MICR No.53933 dated 16-2-2017 an amount of Rs.50,000=00.

The 1^st OP further submitted that, the complainant is not a consumer and the complainant has not paid any consideration to the 1^st OP to avail any services. This forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the present complaint. The 1^st OP is not liable for inconvenience or loss suffered by the complainant due to delay or loss in postal transit or deposit receipts/repayment/interest warrants. As per clause 26 of the terms and conditions governing the deposits schemes of the 1^st OP. The company shall not be responsible for delay or loss in postal transit of deposit receipts/repayment/interest warrants that may be sent to the depositors which was duly accepted and signed by the complainant and hence the complaint merits dismissal.

The 1^st OP further submitted that, this Hon’ble forum has no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present complaint. As per clause 28 of the terms and conditions governing the deposits schemes of the 1^st OP “all transactions are subject to jurisdiction of courts in the NCT of Delhi”. Hence there is no cause of action to file the present complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st OP.  Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost, in the interest of justice and equity.    

5. In the objection, the OP No.3 contended that, the averments made in the complainant are all hereby denied as false, except the alleged speed post lost in transit.

The 3^rd OP submitted that, in the event of loss of speed post article, loss of contents or damages to the contents, the compensation payable to the customer will be double the speed post charges or Rs.1,000=00 whichever is less.

The 3^rd OP further submitted that, the 3^rd OP is liable to make good the loss if any subject to proof to the OP No.1 and 2 and not the complainant in the case. Further it is imperative on the part of the customer to send the bank notes i.e. the cheque by post only in insured letters or insured parcels. Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost, in the interest of justice and equity.

6. In the course of enquiry in to the complaint, the complainant and the 3^rd OP have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant and 3^rd OP have filed their written arguments and the complainant has produced documents which were marked as annexure -1 to 16.  We have heard the arguments of both parties and perused the documents and then posted the cases for orders.

7. Based on the above materials, the following points will arise for our consideration.

1.      Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the OPs as alleged by the complainant?

2.      What Order?      

8. Our findings on the above points are;

                    Point no.1: Partly affirmative

                    Point no.2: As per the final order below.

REASONS

          9. On perusal of the pleadings of the complaint and objection of the OPs, on 17-11-2011 the complainant had invested an amount of Rs.50,000=00 in the Cumulative Fixed Deposit Scheme with the OP No.1 and 2 Company for three years terms and maturity date was on 17-11-2014.

          10. The main contention of the complainant is that, the complainant had received the cumulative interest amount in Nov.2014. But the complainant has not received the FDRs amount of Rs.50,000=00. The complainant further submitted that, since she has not received the deposited amount from the OP No.1 and 2. Thus the complainant has requested the OP No.1 and 2 by issuing several reminders/annexure-1 to 8, but they have not considered the request of the complainant. Hence the complainant has approached this forum for negligence and deficiency in service against the OP No.1 and 2. The complainant further submitted that, the 1^st OP had sent a cheque for Rs.50,000=00 on 18-2-2017 during the pendency of the case before this forum, but the OP No.1 and 2 have not paid the interest amount for the delayed period for 27 months 4 days.

11. On the other hand, the 1^st OP submitted that, the cheque has sent by the 1^st OP to the complainant for the repayment of principal amount of Rs.50,000=00 against the FDR through speed post, that cheque had been lost by the 3^rd OP during the transit. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.1 and 2.

          12. The 3^rd OP has also admitted that, that cheque had been lost during the transit and if any compensation to be paid, it is for the sender of the post or the person who availed the said service and not the addressee. Further submits that, the complainant prays for penal interest for Rs.28,287=00 for delayed period along with cost and compensation. It is not their responsibility to pay the cheque amount, but they are liability to pay double the speed post charges or Rs.1000=00 whichever is less. In this regard, the 3^rd OP has produced document, it reads as under “1 (b) in the event of loss of a sped post article, loss of contents or damage to the contents, the compensation payable to the customer will be double the speed post charges or Rs.1000=00 whichever is less”

          13. Based on the facts and circumstance of the case, the only question arises for our consideration is that, whether the OP No.1 and 2 are liable to pay the interest amount on the deposited amount, since from the date of maturity to till the date of realization. Admittedly, the complainant had issued several letters to the OP No.1 and 2 as per annexure-1 to 8. But the OP No.1 and 2 have not obliged the request of the complainant. Moreover, the OP No.1 and 2 made the complainant to run from pillar to post. However, the OP No.1 and 2 have accepted the mistake only after issuing the notice from the forum and sent deposited amount of Rs.50,000=00 cheque to the complainant, but the OP No.1 and 2 had not paid the interest amount on the deposited amount from the date of maturity till the date of realization. Hence, we hold that, there is negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.1 and 2 in not paying the interest amount to the complainant after the maturity.  Hence, it is just and proper to direct the OP No.1 and 2 to pay the 12.5% interest on the deposited amount from the date of maturity to till the date of realization. Further, the OP No.1 and 2 shall pay the compensation of Rs.5,000=00 and litigation cost of Rs.3,000=00 to the complainant. The complaint filed against the 3^rd OP is dismissed as the 3^rd OP is not a consumer to the complainant and the complainant has not availed any service from the 3^rd OP. Accordingly, we answer the point no.1 in the affirmative.  In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant is partly allowed.

The OP No.1 and 2 jointly and severally liable to pay the interest @ 12.5% per annum on the deposited amount of the complainant from the date of maturity to till the date of realization.

The OP No.1 and 2 further directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000=00 and litigation cost of Rs.3,000=00 respectively to the complainant.

The complaint filed against the 3^rd OP is hereby dismissed. No Costs.

This order is to be complied by the OP No.1 and 2 within 30 days from the date of this order.

          Supply free copy of this order to both parties. 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Forum on this, the 1^st day of September 2017)

LADY MEMBER                                         PRESIDENT