Rajinder Khan filed a consumer case on 13 Feb 2017 against Singhland Investments Ltd. in the Sangrur Consumer Court. The case no is CC/585/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 01 Mar 2017.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR
Complaint no. 585
Instituted on: 03.10.2016
Decided on: 13.02.2017
Rajinder Khan son of Sher Khan, resident of village Tranji Khera Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur.
…. Complainant.
Versus
1. Singhland Investments Ltd. 208, 2nd Floor, Sayali complex above HDFC Bank, Ludhiana through its Branch Manager.
2. Singhland Investments Ltd. Zonal Office: Maharaja Ranjit Singh Market, Shop-cum- Flat No.36 Uppli Road, Sangrur through its Zonal Manager.
3. Singhland Investments Ltd. Branch Officer: Anaj Mandi Dirba Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur through its Branch Manager.
….Opposite parties.
FOR THE COMPLAINANT: Shri Hitesh Jindal Advocate
FOR OPP. PARTIES No.1to3 : Shri J.S.Dhiman, Advocate
Quorum
Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
Sarita Garg, Member
Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member
ORDER:
Sukhpal Singh Gill, President
1. Rajinder Khan complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he obtained a policy bearing number 2812 dated 23.01.2013 from the OPs which was to be matured on 23.01.2018. During September 2015 the complainant approached the OPs at Dirba office for maturity amount then he was told that he deposited Rs.33000/- only and Rs.34650/- would be given to him as prematurity and slip dated 10.09.2015 was issued by the OPs. Thereafter the OPs gave only Rs.10,000/- to the complainant during 2015 out of Rs.34650/-. Then the complainant approached the OPs to release Rs.24650/- so many times but of no fruit. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:-
i) OPs be directed to make the payment of Rs.24650/- along with interest @18% per annum from the date of deposit till realization,
ii) OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment,
iii) OPs be directed to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.
2. In reply filed by the OPs, preliminary objections on the grounds of locus standi and cause of action have been taken up. On merits, it is denied that the complainant has invested an amount of Rs.60000/- in the shape of installments. It is stated that when the complainant has not deposited any amount with the OPs then the question of paying the amount of Rs.80000/- to the complainant does not arise . The complainant has not deposited even a single penny with the OPs company then the question of visiting the branches of the OPs for the release of maturity amount does not arise. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
3. The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-9 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OPs have tendered an affidavit Ex.OP-1 and closed evidence.
4. From the perusal of documents placed on the file and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the complainant obtained a policy bearing number 2812 dated 23.01.2013 from the OPs which was to be matured on 23.01.2018 which is evident from the policy receipt Ex.C-7. The complainant himself has stated that the OPs have released an amount of Rs.10,000/- out of the amount of Rs.34650/- in the year 2015. On the other hand, OPs have totally denied the facts of the complaint. It has been specifically denied by the OPs that the complainant did not deposit an amount of Rs.60000/- with them. Further, the OPs have stated that they did not launch any alleged scheme and the OPs had not issued any policy to the complainant.
5. The complainant has also produced on record slip of payment of Rs.34650/- dated 10.09.2015 Ex.C-12 issued by the OPs which shows that the complainant has deposited the required documents for release of the payment on 10.09.2015. The said receipt/ slip is also duly signed by the OPs. But, we failed to understand that when the copy of slip for submission of required documents for release of the payment Ex.C-6 issued by the OPs is on record then on what basis the OPs have denied all facts regarding deposit of the amount and issuance of any receipt to the complainant. We find that the record/ documents produced on the file clearly show regarding investment of said amount by the complainant with the OPs.
6. For the reasons recorded above, we find that the OPs have totally denied the facts of the complaint whereas evidence produced by the complainant on record fully proves his case. As such, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs to make payment of Rs.24650/- to the complainant within two months from the date of maturity i.e. 23.01.2018 failing which the OPs are liable to pay interest @9% per annum from the date of maturity i.e. 23.01.2018 of the policy till realization. We further order the OPs to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.2000/- as compensation on account of mental pain, agony, harassment and litigation expenses..
7. This order of ours shall be complied with within 60 days from the receipt of copy of the order. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course. Announced
February 13, 2017
( Vinod Kumar Gulati ) ( Sarita Garg) (Sukhpal Singh Gill)
Member Member President
BBS/-
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.