DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

1.     Tarlochan Singh

2.     Jasbir Kaur wife of Sh.Tarlochan Singh

        Both r/o House No.1623, Phase V, Mohali.

…..Complainants

                                V E R S U S

State Bank of India Staff Association having its office at 858, Shivalik Apartment, Sector 49-A, Chandigarh, through its Chairman/Secretary               

……Opposite Party

QUORUM:  RAJINDER SINGH GILL                                 MEMBER

                   DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA         MEMBER

Argued by: Sh.Sunil Kumar, Counsel for complainants.

                  OP already exparte.

PER RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER

1.             Sh.Tarlochan Singh & Smt.Jasbir Kaur,  complainants have filed this consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against State Bank of India Staff Association - Opposite Party (hereinafter called the OP), alleging that the complainants had deposited Rs.10,19,840/- with OP for the period of 2009-10 against which, OP issued different FDRs, which were matured on the different dates along with interest. The details of the FDRs, which are also detailed in Annexures C-1 to C-8 are as under :-

1. FDR No.9872 dated 04.01.2010 for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- due date 06.01.2013.

2. FDR No.9777 dated 06.07.2009 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- due date 06.07.2012.

3.  FDR No.9776 dated 04.07.2009 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- due date 06.07.2012.

4.     FDR No. 9721 dated 27.04.2009 for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- due date 27.04.2010 again renewed.

5.     FDR No. 9870 dated 04.01.2010 for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- due date 04.01.2013.

6.     FDR No.9871 dated 04.01.2010 for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- due date 04.01.2013.

7.     FDR No.9678 dated 23.02.2009 for a sum of Rs.1,19,840/- due date 23.02.2012.

8.     FDR No.9638/9600 dated 20.11.2008 for a sum of Rs.50,000/- due date 20.11.2012.

As per the FDRs, the amount was to be paid by the OP to the complainants along with interest after the date of maturity. The complainants averred that initially some interest was paid by the OP to them upto December, 2010 but, thereafter, the OP did not pay any interest. The total interest which was paid to the complainants was Rs.93,640/-. The complainants further averred that after great persuasion, the OP issued a cheque bearing No.253626 dated 7.7.2011 for a sum of Rs.16,50,000/- drawn on State Bank of India but the same was dishonoured with remarks “Insufficient Funds”. Thereafter, the complainants sent a legal notice to OPs regarding dishonour of cheque but OP failed to make any payment. The complainant had filed a complaint under Section 138 of N.I.Act which is pending in the Court of Sh.Ajit Pal Singh, JMIC, Chandigarh. The complainants had come to know that various persons had deposited their money with OP but the OP did not pay any interest. As such, the complainants decided to refund back their entire amount. The complainants also approached the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Society, UT, Chandigarh to take action against the OP but till date, it did not take any action against the OP. The complainants were informed by the OP through letter dated 7.4.2012 that OP is trying to collect the amount from the persons with whom they invested the amounts of the investors and advised the complainants to maintain the calm and seek their support. Ultimately, the complainants sent a legal notice to the OP but to no avail. Hence, this complaint.

2.             OP was served through Process Server but nobody appeared on its behalf to contest the case and as such, it was proceeded exparte on 07.09.2012.

3.             We have gone through the exparte evidence of Sh.Tarlochan Singh, complainant No.1 and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the complainants.

4.             The allegations of the complainants are supported by the affidavit of Sh.Tarlochan Singh, complainant No.1, the copies of FDRs – Annexures C-1 to  C-8, copy of dishonoured cheque & bank memo – Annexures C-9 and C-10, copy of complaint against OP under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act – Annexure C-11, copy of letter dated 7.4.2012 received from OP – Annexure C-12, copy of legal notice dated 20.6.2012 – Annexure C-13, copy of postal receipts – Annexures C-14 & C-15.  The evidence of the complainant has gone unrebutted because the OP has not come forward to contest the complaint. It is proved from the exparte evidence on record that the complainants deposited an amount of Rs.10,19,840/- with OP against the different FDRs. As per the complainants, the total amount of interest on all the FDRs till July, 2012 amounts to Rs.4,22,850/- and the OP had already paid a sum of Rs.93,640/- to the complainants meaning thereby the total due amount of interest is Rs.3,29,210/-. As such, the total amount including principal amount and interest works out to Rs.13,49,050/- (Rs.10,19,840/- + Rs.3,29,210/-). It is a clear case of deficiency in service on the part of OP because the OP has failed to make the payment, despite receipt of legal notice.

5.             Accordingly, we find merit in the complaint and the same is allowed. The OP is directed :-

i)              To pay a sum of Rs.13,49,050/- to the complainants.

ii)             To pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainants towards compensation and litigation expenses.

6.             This order be complied with by OP within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, OP shall be liable to refund the awarded amount to the complainants along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint, till its realization.

7.             The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.