This case has been filed by the complainant with a prayer for a direction upon the Ops to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.20,000/- as maturity amount and other reliefs.
Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he invested a sum of rs.50,000/- only on 15.04.2013 in the OPs company being Customer ID No. TLL0092427 as fixed deposit and the maturity amount was fixed at Rs. 1,00,000/- as on 25.00.2018. After the date of maturity the complainant claimed the said maturity amount and deposited all the relevant papers before the Ops but the Ops did not pay the same.
Hence, this case.
Summons were duly served upon the Ops but none of them appeared to contest the claim application. So, the case is heard ex parte against the Ops and this ex parte order is passed.
The points for determination is whether the case is maintainable and whether the complainant is entitled to get the decree as prayed for.
Decision with Reasons.
Both the points are taken up together for consideration.
We have perused the affidavit of the complainant and also the copy of the certificate/money receipt produced by the complainant and find that the particulars of the complaint fully tally with the particulars of the certificate. None of the Ops has turned up to controvert the statement of the complainant. so, the complainant has been successful in proving the case.
Two decisions reported in 2016(4) , CPR 325 (NC) and 2016 (4) CPR 723 (NC) have been referred in support of the case of the complainant. The first decisions says non-payment of
redemption value/maturity amount even on receipt of the unit certificate is an act of deficiency in rendering service on the part of the Company. Here the Ops did not controvert that the complainant paid the amount as asserted by him.
The second decisions speaks that depositor shall have continuous cause of action to seek recovery f the amount of his fixed deposit.
In this case it appears that sham paper transaction has been created in order to take deposit of money from the presumably illiterate persons Consumer Forum being a beneficial legislation, here President cannot overlook this type of transaction .Forum cannot also also overlook that in this way some companies are taking money from the poor people and filling up their iron chest.
Ld advocate for the complainant argued tha he along with many persons have been cheated by the Co. They did not get any offer document from the Ops except the certificate as above. They have invested money with the Co. o the assurance that they would get maximum value after the maturity period. But they have not received the said amount.
In Civil Appeal No.3883 of 2007 (SC) Hon’ble Justice MB Lakur observed in a dispute concerning a consumer “ it is necessary for the courts to take a pragmatic view of the righrts of the consumer principally since it is the consumer who is placed at a disadvantage visa vise the supplier of service or goods. It is to overcome this advantage that a beneficial legislation in the form of C P Act 1986 was enacted by the Parliament”.
In view of the aforesaid decisions and on the basis of the uncontroverted statement made in the complaint supported by affidavit, it is clearly established that the complainant is a Consumer under the CP Act 1986 and there is deficiency of service on the part of the OPs according to this Act.
Hon’ble National Commission of India held that technicalities will not be looked into very seriously while dealing with the consumer case.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the CC No.517 of 2018 be and the same is allowed ex parte against the OPs.
Both the Ops are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1.00,000/- to the complainants along with interest @ 10% per annum from the date of maturity till full realization of the awarded amount within one month from the date of this order, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to put this order into execution.
Let the copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs.
