Punjab

Sangrur

CC/321/2017

Raksinder Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

SMD Infra Ventures Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Davinder Sharda

21 Nov 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                            

 

 

                                                                        Complaint No. 321

Instituted on:   11.07.2017

                                                                        Decided on:     21.11.2017

 

 

Raksinder Kaur aged about 60 years wife of Late Harbhagwan Sharma son of Sh. Ram Sarup, resident of Krishna Colony, H.No.705/B, Near Haa Da Naara Gurudwara, Malerkotla, District  Sangrur.

                                                        …. Complainant.      

       

                                         Versus

 

1.     SMD Infra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. 22B, Balaji Enclave, Lohgarh Road, Zirakpur-140603 (Punjab) through its Managing Director/Owner/Authorized Signatory and Directors Mohd. Mugni Usmni and Jitinder Jain and Sandeep Jindal.

2.     Mohd. Mugni Usmani Director of SMD Infra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Office, Lee Palaza, Near Jain Sweets, Malerkotla, District Sangrur.

3.     Shri Jitinder Jain, Director, SMD Infra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Office Backside Main Post Office, Near Court Complex, Sangrur.

4.     Shri Sandeep Jindal, Managing Director, SMD Infra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Office backside Main Post Office, Near Court Complex, Sangrur.

5.     Mr. Tinkashver @ Tinku Jain son of Prem Nath, resident of Krishna Colony, Near Haa Daa Gurudwara, Malerkotla, District Sangrur(Authorized Agent of OP number 1 to 4).

             ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:    Shri Davinder Sharda, Advocate                          

 

FOR OPP. PARTY No.1               :    Shri G.S.Shergill, Advocate 

 

FOR OPP.PARTY NO.2to5  :   Exparte.                  

 

Quorum

         

                   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                   Sarita Garg, Member

                   Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

                 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Smt. Raksinder Kaur, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that on the request of OP number 5, the complainant availed the services of the Ops number 1 to 4 by investing an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- each vide registration number SMD01295 dated 3.4.2013 and vide registration number SMD01505 on 7.6.2013 which were to be returned an amount of Rs.1,28,400/- after  a period of three years i.e. on 2.4.2016 and 6.6.2016, respectively. It is further averred that as per the terms and conditions of the policy, the OP was required to pay Rs.1000/- per month as interest per policy meaning thereby the Ops were to pay Rs.2000/- per month for two polices and by this way the Ops were to pay Rs.1,28,400/- as maturity value plus Rs.36000/- as interest. The case of the complainant is that the Ops paid only an amount of Rs.15,000/-.  Further case of the complainant is that besides the above, the OP number 1 to 5 conducted a draw of the members as per their scheme and in that draw the complainant won the prize of car and as such in lieu of car, the OPs issued a bond certificate number SMDP00813 showing the investment of Rs.1,75,000/- on 29.12.2014 and on maturity the amount was payable to the tune of Rs.1,94,250/- on 29.12.2015, which was issued by the sister concern of the Ops i.e. SMD Premier Thrift and Credit Co-operative Society Limited.  Further case of the complainant is that an account number SMDB00378437 was also opened in the name of the complainant, in which an amount of Rs.2,32,675.83 is lying as credit balance, but the same was also not released. Further grievance of the complainant is that though she approached the Ops so many times for refund of the amount, but all in vain. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to release the payment of Rs.1,28,400/- plus Rs.36,000/- as interest  from 3.4.2013 to 2.4.2016  and further an amount of Rs.1,28,400/- along with interest @ 18% per annum  from the date of maturity i.e. 2.4.2016 till realization, to pay Rs.1,28,400/- plus Rs.36000/- as interest for the period from 7.6.2013 to 6.6.2016 along with further interest on the maturity amount of Rs.1,28,400/- from the due date i.e. 6.6.2016 to realization and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by Ops number 1 to 4, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable, that the complainant is not a consumer,  that the complaint is false, frivolous, vague and vexatious in nature. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant had invested an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- under two different policies with the OP number 1 and the interest was duly paid. The amount shown in the bond is projected value and no promise was made by the OP to make the payment.  It is stated that the complainant is the member of the society only.  The other allegations leveled in the complaint have been denied in toto.

 

3.             Record shows that the OPs number 2 to 5 did not appear despite service, as such, they were proceeded exparte.

 

4.             The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-3 copies of registration letters, Ex.C-4 copy of judgment dated 12.6.2017 and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.OP-1 affidavit and closed evidence.

 

5.             We have very carefully perused the pleadings of the parties, evidence produced on the file and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

6.             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 had invested an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- on 3.4.2013 vide registration number SMD01295 which was repayable on 2.4.2016 as Rs.1,28,400/- and also invested an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- on 7.6.2013 which was repayable on 6.6.2016 as Rs.1,28,400/-, as is evident from the copies of registration letter on record as Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-3. The complainant has further stated that though he submitted all the required documents  with the OPs, but the OPs have failed to repay the maturity amount of Rs.1,28,400/- under both the registration letters to the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has argued that the Ops had sold the plot of 12 sq. ft. to the complainant and had not promised to pay the amount of Rs.1,28,400/- in both the cases.  However, the projected amount payable to the complainant was Rs.1,28,400/- as mentioned in the document Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-3.  The fact remains that the Ops have neither offered any plot of 1200 sq. feet in each case nor returned the amount of Rs.1,28,400/- nor gave any such a plot. Further, no document has been produced by the OPs to show that they have  purchased any land for allotment to the complainant. In the circumstances, we feel that the Ops are duty bound to return him the promised amount on maturity. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the Ops that an agreement was executed between the parties and there was a specific clause in the agreement that if there is any dispute pertaining to the said agreement, then the same will be referred to the arbitrator for resolution of the dispute. But, we may mention that section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act provides that the provisions of this Act are in addition to and not in derogation of any other law for the time being in force and the same view was also taken in 2013(2) CLT 437 (Punjab). As such, we are of the considered opinion that this point of referring the matter to the arbitrator has also been decided by this Forum as mentioned above.  

 

7.             So, in view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs to make the payment of Rs.1,28,400/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the due date of payment i.e. 02.04.2016 till realization under registration letter number SMD01295 Ex.C-2 and further make the payment of Rs.1,28,400/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the due date of payment i.e. 6.6.2016 till realization under registration letter number SMD01505. We further order the OPs to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.6000/- on account of compensation and further Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses.

 

8.             This order of ours shall be complied with within 30 days from the receipt of copy of the order.  A copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.       

Pronounced.

 

                November 21, 2017.

 

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                                President

 

 

                                               

                                                             (Sarita Garg)

                                                                 Member

 

 

 

                                                        (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                                Member