SMT. BANDANA ROY, PRESIDENT

In short, case of the Complainant is that he invested a sum of 5000/- on 26.03.12 for 5 years as 5 secured non-convertible redeemable debentures of Rs 1000/- each being Folio no.LD-01/459/1833 and certificate no. C/1833/1665/003/932(10-11). The amount of redemption was Rs. 10167/- and the redemption date was on 26.03.2017. The complainant demanded the said redemption value, but the OPs did not pay any amount. So, this case has been filed with a prayer for direction upon the Ops to return a sum of Rs.10167/- and compensation alongwith litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.

Summons were issued upon both the Opposite Parties. But although the OPs appeared and prayed for time to file WV but did not file WV. So, the case is heard ex parte against the OPs.

Point to be considered in this case is whether the case is maintainable and (2) whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief(s) sought for by him.

Decision with reasons

Both the points are taken up together for discussion and decision.

          We have carefully perused the affidavit of the complainant and all the documents filed by the complainant. From the copy of the receipt issued by the OP no.2  signed by the Director and authorized signatory of the company, it is found that the OP received the amount as mentioned in the certificates and also referred by the complainant in the complaint. The date of redemption and the amount of redemption clearly tally with that of the complaint petition. It is the case of the complainant that the OPs did not pay the redemption value as agreed between him and the Co. which is not controverted by either of the OPs.

          Three decisions reported in (1) 2015(2),CPR 481 (NC), (2) 2016(4),CPR 325 (NC) and (3) 2016(4),CPR 723 (NC) have been referred in support of the case of the complainant. The first decision says non- payment of redemption amount even on receipt of the unit certificates is an act of deficiency in rendering service on the part of the Company. Here the Opposite Parties did not controvert that the complainant paid the amount as asserted by the complainant.   

          The third decision speaks that depositor shall have continuous cause of action to seek recovery of 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 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 that he along with many persons have been cheated by the Co. They did not get any offer document from the Opposite Parties except the certificate as above. They have invested money with the Co. on the assurance that they would get maximum value after the maturity period. But they have not received said amount.

          In Civil Appeal No. 3883 of 2007 (Supreme court) Hon’ble Justice of Madan B. Lakur observed in a dispute concerning a consumer, it is necessary for the courts to take a pragmatic view  of the rights of the consumer principally since it is the consumer who is placed at a disadvantage  vis a vis the supplier of service or goods. It is to overcome this advantage that a beneficent legislation in the form of C Act 1986 was enacted by a Parliament.

          In view 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 C P Act 1986 and there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties according to the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

         Hon’ble National Commission of India held that technicalities will not be looked into very seriously while dealing with the consumer case.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

That CC/541 of 2017 be and the same is allowed ex parte against the OPs.

          Both the Opposite Parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10167/- along with interest @10% per annum from the date of redemption till final realization and compensation of Rs. 500/- and litigation cost of Rs. 500/- within two month from the date of this order, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to put this order into execution. 

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