1.                     The brief history of the case of the complainant is that she had obtained 500 units under Rajalaxmi Unit Plan (II) RUP (II) Scheme from the Ops in the name of her minor daughter Dipika Mishra on payment of Rs.5000/- vide Membership No.202960070002301 dt.26.02.1996, Id No.160596635, the date of maturity of which was 26.2.2016.  It is submitted that the complainant tried to contact the agent in order to know the status of her deposit but the agent was not seen.  On approach to OP.2 sometimes ago, the complainant was assured to get her benefits in time.  The complainant on 17.11.2015 enquired with OP.2 about her deposit through a registered letter but the said OP.2 did not prefer to reply.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, she has filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to refund Rs.5000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from 26.2.1996 and to pay Rs.10, 000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant.

2.                     The Ops filed counter in joint admitting investment of Rs.5000/- in favour of girl child Dipika Mishra on 26.2.1996 by her parents Mrs. Anusaya Samantray and she was allotted Unit Certificate No.202960070002301 for 500 Units. It is contended that due to short fall in the desired returns and declining of trend in debt market and to safe guard the overall interest of the beneficiary of the said scheme, the scheme was fore closed on 31.5.2004 by SUUTI.  It is further contended that after closure of the RUP-94 (II), the proceed was converted into 145 Nos of ARS bonds on 01.4.2004 and the bond certificate was dispatched to the complainant as per address given which was returned by the postal authorities as undelivered on 20.5.2004.  The Ops also submitted that ARS bonds matured after 5 years and they have sent intimation letters to the complainant on 17.12.2008 and 29.2.2012 by ordinary post in order to know if there is any change in the address, A/c. No. etc. to update their records and process the maturity amount.  The Ops also further contended that they are ready to release the redemption proceeds of Rs.14, 500/- with interest amount of Rs.4785/- and Rs.62.36 of residue amount against bond certificate No.30960785 for 145 bonds to the complainant.  Thus denying any deficiency in service on their part, the Ops prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                     Both the parties have filed certain documents in support of their cases.  The Ops filed affidavit.  Heard from the parties through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.

4.                     In this case it is an admitted fact that the complainant had obtained 500 units under RUP (II) Scheme in the name of her minor daughter Dipika Mishra on payment of Rs.5000/- vide Membership No.202960070002301 dt.26.2.1996, Id No.160596635 with date of maturity dt.26.2.2016.  The case of the complainant is that she contacted different authorities of Ops in order to know the status of her deposit but could not know anything.  Hence she sent a registered letter dt.17.11.2015 to OP.2 requesting to intimate the present status of the scheme but in vain.

5.                     The Ops in their counter stated that RUP (II) was terminated in the year 2004 by UTI due to uncertainty in the equity market and danger to erosion of capital investment and in order to keep the interest of the investors, the proceeds were converted into ARS bonds on 01.4.2004.  The Ops have filed copy of ARS bond certificate for 145 bonds with face value of Rs.14, 500/- with date of maturity 01.4.2009.  In their counter the Ops also admitted that on maturity of ARS bonds the complainant is entitled to get Rs.14, 500/- together with interest of Rs.4785/- including Rs.62.36 of residual amount against bond certificate No.30960785.

6.                     It is a fact that UTI is a statutory Corporation established u/s.3 of UTI Act and discharging its function to act on business principles, regard being had to the interest of the unit holders.  Hence the decision of the Ops to terminate RUP (II) was bona fide and was taken consciously after taking into account of relevant factors including shortfall in desired returns, volatility and decline in the debt market.  Further it is seen that the fore closure amount under RUP (II) of the complainant was reinvested under ARS Bond and 145 units were purchased in the name of the child w.e.f. 01.4.2004 till 01.4.2009 and the Ops declared the maturity amount of Rs.14500/- + interest of Rs.4785/- including Rs.62.36 of residual amount against the ARS bond.

7.                     Further the case of the complainant is that the Ops had not informed about the closure of RUP (II) Scheme and purchase of ARS bond.  It is ascertained that the Ops have filed copy of postal cover sent to the complainant which was returned with remark. The document shows that the registered letter returned due to absence of the complainant in her residential address.  Hence the allegation of the complainant that she was not informed about her deposit is wrong.

8.                     In view of the facts which have been placed before us it is established that the interest of the investor is amply protected by the Ops and after seeing the market condition the scheme is being discontinued.  While performing its function the Board of UTI which is the highest decision taking body has taken appropriate decision to terminate the scheme.  Further for the safeguard of the interest of the investors the foreclosure value was reinvested in ARS bond.  Hence we do not find any fault on the part of YTI.

9.                     In this case, as disclosed by the Ops, they are ready to release the redemption proceeds under ARS Bond Certificate No.30960785 for 145 units as on the scheme maturity date 01.04.2009.  It is also seen that the above maturity amount is lying with Ops from the date of maturity and certainly accrues some interest. Hence the bond holder is entitled for the interest on (Rs.14, 500/- + Rs.4785/- + Rs.62.36/-) = Rs.19, 347.36. Further as the ARS bond bears 6.60% of interest, we feel the award of interest @ 6.60% on the maturity amount will be just and proper.  In the peculiar circumstances of the case we are not inclined to award any compensation and cost in favour of the complainant.

10.                   Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the Ops being jointly and severally liable are directed to pay Rs.19347.36 with interest @ 6.60 % p.a. from 01.4.2009 till payment to the bond holder in their A/c. No.32305865452 (Joint account in the name of Anusaya Samantray and Dipika Mishra, State Bank of India, Bazar Branch 0101, Jeypore) within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

(to dict.)