Smt. Syeda Shahnur Ali, Member

This is a complaint made by one Sri Surajit Manna against the Branch Manager and Managing Director of PINCON GROUP OF COMPANIES praying for a direction upon the OPs to return the total matured value of Rs.500000/- along with interest @ 10% till realization, and compensation for a sum of Rs.100000/- and litigation cost of Rs.20000/-.

In short, case of the Complainant, is that, he invested a sum of Rs.1000/- each per month as 10 recurring deposits with the OP No. 2 through OP No. 1 being Certificate No. GFPL/003/12-13/A301003222, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003221, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003223, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003220, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003228, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003219, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003225, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003227, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003224, GFPL/003/12-13/A301003226. The maturity value of the said deposits were Rs.500000/- which matured on 20.06.2015. On maturity, Complainant demanded the matured amount from the OP and submitted all relevant documents to facilitate this.  However, OPs have not settled his claim hence, this case.

OP No. 2 contested the case by filing WV, the OP No. 1 in spite of receiving summons refused the same so the case is heard ex-parte against OP No. 1, whereby OP No. 2 denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It is further stated that the Complainant claimed the maturity proceeds through his Ld. Advocate without furnishing relevant documents for this purpose. So, this OP asked the Complainant to submit requisite documents, but the Complainant is yet to furnish the same. Thus, this OP prayed for dismissal of the case.

Point to be considered in this case is whether or not the Complainant is entitled to the relief(s) sought for by him.

Decision with reasons

We have carefully perused the affidavit of the complainant and all the documents filed by the complainant. After going through the W/V of the OP No. 2 it appears that the OP more or less admitted their fault. OP’s ld. Lawyer submitted that they will pay the claim of the complainant within 3 months. They have also stated that they demanded from the complainant original certificate, original challan from the complainant, but complainant did not file the same. But nothing has been proved by cogent evidence by the OP. Hence, we are of the view that complainant is entitled to get the maturity value of the investment.

This complaint case, thus, succeeds.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

That CC/74/2016 is and the same is allowed on contest against the OP No. 2 and ex parte against the OP No. 1.  OPs are directed to pay, within 40 days hence, a sum of Rs. 500000/- to the Complainant along with compensation in the form of interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of this order, i.e., and litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/-. OP no 2 is further directed to pay cost of Rs 500/- as per order dated 10-08-2016. Noncompliance of this order within the aforesaid stipulated time frame would entail a fine @ Rs. 100/- per diem from this date till full and final payment is made. The complainant is at liberty to put the order in execution as per law after the stipulated period is over.

Let the copies of the judgement be supplied to all the parties free of cost.