In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,

Murshidabad at   Berhampore.

Case No. CC/19/2016

Date of filing:  09/02 /2016                                                                               Date of Final Order: 27/10/2016

Suman Mondal & 48 others

P.O.& P.S.- Berhampore.

Dist- Murshidabad, PIN.-742101.(W.B.)………………………………………………………...Complainant                             

                                                 - Vs-

The Branch Manager, Togo Retail Marketing Ltd.

Berhampore Branch, situated at Panchanantala,

Near Mayarani Petrol Pump, P.O.& P.S.- Berhampore.

Dist.- Murshidabad. Pin.-742101 (W.B.)………………………..   Opposite Party

Mr.Debmalya Dutta. Ld. Advocate………………………………………for the Complainants.            

Ex-parte against the OP

                      Present:   Hon’ble President, Anupam Bhattacharyya.           

                                        Hon’ble Member,  Samaresh Kumar Mitra.           

FINAL ORDER

Samaresh Kumar Mitra, Presiding Member:

                The simple version of these complainants as enumerated in the complaint is that the complainants deposited money to the OP on different dates on different schemes as they were assured by the OP that they will be benefited other than any nationalized banks and other financial institutions if they deposit money before the OP. The issued certificates in respect of deposited money before the OP were matured in the year 2014 copy of which are annexed with the case record. After the maturity the complainants went to the office of the OP several times and requested him to refund their maturity amount but the OP did not pit no hid at the request of the depositors.  That after long days the OP informed the complainants to deposit all the original certificates to him. The complainants submitted all the original certificates to the OP through registered post on different dates. But till date OP did not pay the matured amount to the complainants which amounts to deficiency on service on the part of the OP and as such the complainants have no other alternative but filed this complaint against the OP for redress as hereunder.

                Getting no money from the OP after the maturity the Complainants filed the instant complaint before this Forum for redressal as prayed for in the prayer portion of the complaint.

             The OP received notice on 10.03.2016 and the delivery details as supplied by the Berhampore Head Post Office received by this Forum thereafter. Despite receiving notice OP did not turn up so the proceedings run ex-parte against him.

            Thereafter the complainants filed evidence on affidavit in which they assailed that the OP company is running money laundering having its branch office at the above mentioned address under the name & style Togo Marketing Ltd, Vamshi Chemicals Ltd., Jaig Polymers Ltd., Geoshima mines 2 Metals Ltd., Nixcil Pharmaceuticals Specialities Ltd, Milani Techno Engineering Ltd.. That being assured they deposited money to the OP on different dates on different schemes and the OP issued certificates regarding all the deposited money scheme and the certificates were matured in the year 2014 to 2016 and they will get a matured amount of sum of Rs.18,23,662/- only from the OP and the Xerox copy of certificates are annexed with the case record. After the several requests of the complainants the OP did not pay the matured amounts of the complainants which come within the purview of deficiency of service for which the complainants sought the recourse of this Forum for getting direction upon the OP to pay the matured amount of Rs.18,23,662/- and to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation and Rs.25,000/- as litigation cost.

               The agent on behalf of the complainants advanced arguments in ex-parte and it is heard in full and fixed next date for passing Final Order.        

From the discussion herein above, we find the following Issues/Points for consideration.

ISSUES/POINTS   FOR   CONSIDERATION

1).    Whether the Complainants Suman Mondal & 48 others are ‘Consumers’ of the opposite party?

2).    Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?

3). Whether the O.P. carried on unfair trade practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?

4). Whether the complainants proved their case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to them?

5). Whether the complainants are entitled to relief(s) as prayed for?

DECISIONS WITH  REASONS

                    In the light of discussions herein above we find that the following issues/points should be decided based on the above perspectives.

  1).Whether the Complainants Suman Mondal & 48 are ‘Consumers’ of the opposite party?

                  From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainants are “Consumers” as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. As the complainants herein being the customers of OP by investing money in different schemes, are entitled to get service from the OPs.

 (2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?

                Both the complainants and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Murshidabad and cause of action took place at Berhampore, Murshidabad. The complaint valued at Rs.18,23,662/- and Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation and Rs.25000/- as cost ad valorem which is within Rs.20,00,000/-limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.            

    (3).Whether the opposite party carried on Unfair Trade Practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?

              After perusing the Complaint Petition, Evidence on Affidavit and also the documents as filed by these complainants and hearing the arguments as advanced by the agent of the complainants it appears that the complainants deposited sums in different schemes like Redeemable Cumulative Preference Shares of Milani Techno Engineering Limited ( Mahanagar Ext,, Lucknow), Jaig Polymers Ltd. (Sultanpur,U.P.) and Recurring Deposits before Togo Retail Marketing Limited before the OP. And as per the Xerox copies of documents as produced by the complainants that the name of the card holder is Suman Mondal (Complainant No.1), Nominee- Dipti Mandal, in which there is seal & signature of authorized signatory of Togo Retail Marketing Limited. From these documents we can see that the complainant deposited  sums in 36 equal installments of Rs.500/- each being A/C No.151749-7108M & sums in 36 equal installments of Rs.500/- each being A/C No.151750-7108M in recurring deposits and similarly other 48 complainants invested in recurring deposits and/or in Redeemable Cumulative Preference Shares. The documents of investment are produced in Xerox copies. But it is not clear whether the complainants received the said matured amounts from the OP and how the shares of other than the Togo Retail Marketing Limited are purchased from the OP. The complainants by filing affidavits demanded that the shares other than the Togo Retail Marketing Limited are purchased from the OP and they did not receive the matured amounts till date and as the OP did not meet the demand of the complainants so these complainants getting no alternative filed the instant complaint for getting matured amount including interest and compensation & cost.

          The complaint petition is unchallenged one as the OP did not appear and file his written version, so the proceedings run ex-parte against the OP despite receiving notice of this Forum. The complainants invested such money in good faith for getting handsome return from the OP in moderate rate of interest. And after the maturity the OP did not return the maturity value to these complainants for which these complainants getting no alternative compelled to take the recourse of this Forum for redressal as prayed for in the prayer portion of the complaint. These complainants after the expiry of the period as fixed earlier approached the OP for getting the matured sum but the OP did not show good gesture upon the complainants by paying the matured amounts. As such the OP is deficient in providing service to these complainants and they are also in the charge of unfair trade practice. So the demand of the complainants are valid, cogent and at per but not excessive or exorbitant. So the complainants are entitled to get maturity benefits, including interest @ 10% per annum since date of maturity till the realization and each complainant will get litigation cost of Rs.2000/- from the OP  within a period of 45 days from the passing this order.

4.  Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?

           The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainants are able to prove their cases. So, the Opposite Party is liable to compensate the Complainants as we deem fit and proper.

5. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief(s) prayed for?

       As it is already proved in the discussion at point No. 3, the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the Opposite Party cannot be ousted and as such the Complainants are entitled to get relief(s).

                Hence it is ordered that the complaint be and the same is allowed on ex-parte against the Opposite Party with a litigation cost of Rs.2000/- to each complainant.

                     The Opposite party is hereby directed to pay the matured amounts plus maturity benefits to each complainant as per their investment, including interest @ 10% since the date of maturity till date of realization within 45 days from the passing this final order.

No other relief (s) is awarded to these complainants.

       The Opposite Party is further directed to deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- in the Consumer Legal Aid Account for unfair trade practice within 45 days from the date of passing this  final order.

        At the event of failure to comply with the order the Opposite Party shall pay fine @Rs.50/- for each day’s delay, if caused, on expiry of the aforesaid 45 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any, in the Consumer Legal Aid Account.

         Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied, free of cost, to the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgement/ be sent forthwith under registered post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.

  Dictated and corrected by me.

         Member,                                                                                  President.