Date of filing : 28.02.2019
Date of Judgment: 24.11.2021
Mrs. Sashi Kala Basu, Hon’ble President.
This consumer complaint is filed by the complainant namely Sweta Dutta Banik, under Section 12 of the C.P Act , 1986 against the opposite party ( referred to as O.P hereinafter) namely Teacher’s Welfare Credit & Holding Ltd., alleging deficiency in service on its part.
The case of the complainant, in short, is that the complainant deposited a total sum of Rs.1,55,000/- for 36 months towards MIS on 13.05.2015 with interest @ 9% p.a with the O.P being Account no. BNS/34238/15/16 . The amount payable on its maturity was Rs.1,55,000/- on 13.5.2018. O.P is a non-banking company registered under the Company’s Act, being represented by its Director Swapan Kumar Ghosh. On maturity of the said deposited amount when the complainant visited the office of the O.P and asked for maturity amount, she was asked to deposit her MIS Certificate in original with the Director namely Swapan Kumar Ghosh. But no payment was made by the O.P inspite of the repeated visits by the complainant. So, the complaint has been filed by the complainant praying for directing the O.P to pay the maturity amount of Rs. 1,55,000/- along with interest @9% p.a , to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.20,000/- as litigation cost.
The complainant has filed receipt issued by the O.P being A/C no. BNS/34238/15/16.
The O.P has contested the case by filing written version denying and disputing the allegations. However, it is specifically contended that the O.P offered to the complainant to make payment by instalments. But the complainants did not agree with the proposal. The O.P is ready and willing to refund the invested amount but unable to pay the same as the bank account of the O.P has been seized by the Directorate of Economic Offence.
So, the only point requires determination is whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed?
Decision with reasons
In support of her claim as referred to above, complainant has filed receipt no.34238 in respect of the account no. BNS/34238/15/16 issued by the O.P company represented by its Director named therein. The receipt was issued in the name of the complainant on deposit of an amount of Rs.1,55,000/- for 36 months with interest @9% p.a . The said deposit was made on 13.5.2015 and it was to be refunded on 13.5.2018. The maturity amount payable was Rs.1,55,000/-. It is apparent from the written version filed by the O.P that the deposit of the said amount with the O.P and issuance of the certificate by the O.P has not been denied and disputed. It is specifically stated in the written version that they never denied to make the payment and had offered to the complainant to make the payment by instalments. But the complainant did not agree and the O.P is always ready and willing to refund the invested amount to the complainant. If that be so, then since admittedly the said amount was deposited by the complainant, she is entitled to refund of the maturity amount as mentioned in the receipt issued by the O.P. So, complainant is entitled to the matured amount of Rs.1,55,000/- along with interest @9% p.a as agreed . However, since interest is allowed, we find no justification to pass an order of compensation as prayed for.
Hence,
ORDERED
that CC/127/2019 be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.P.
The O.P is directed to pay Rs. 1,55,000/- to the complainant together with interest @9% p.a from the date as agreed on the certificate to till this date within 2 months from this date.
The O.P is further directed to pay Rs.8000/- as litigation cost within the aforesaid period of 2 months. In default of payment the entire sum shall carry interest @9% p.a till realisation.
On payment of the sum by the O.P, complainant shall hand over the original receipt/certificate to the O.P.
