West Bengal

Bankura

CC/34/2023

Sri Sukumar Sebait - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager,Angel Allied India Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Suman Patra

20 Feb 2024

ORDER

   IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANKURA 

  Consumer Complaint No. 34/2023

                                                             Date of Filing:   18/04/2023                                                

Before:                                        

1. Samiran Dutta                            Ld. President.      

2. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member. 

 

For the Complainant:  Ld. Advocate: Suman Patra

For the O.P. : Ld. Advocate Prasun Kumar Bandyopadhyay / Ld. Advocate Jagannath Gorai

Complainant  

 Sri Sukumar Sebait, S/O Sri Nimai Sebait, R/O Gokulnagar, P.O. Gokulnagar, Dist.Bankura, PIN-722 122      

Opposite Party 

1.The Branch Manager, Angel Allied India Limited, Bishnupur, Sonarbangla Lodge, Near Bus Stand, P.O.Bishnupur, Dist. Bankura, PIN- 722 122

2.Sk. Najibulla (Director), Angel India Limited, 8/1 A, Little Russel Street, 4^th Floor, Kolkata- 700 071 @ Sk. Najibulla, S/o Jillur Rahim Sekh, R/o Chak Aahmmad, Arambagh, Dist. Hooghly, PIN- 721 615

 

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT

Order No.13

Dated: 20-02-2024

Both parties file hazira through Advocate.

W.V. is filed by the O.P. at the belated stage.

The case is taken up for final disposal in presence of both sides.

The Complainant’s case is that he invested certain money with O.P./Cheat Fund as listed below but the O.P. failed to repay the maturity amount on the respective maturity date.

Sl No.	Name of Depositoir	Certificate Number	Deposit Date	Principle amount (Rs)	Maturity Amount (Rs)	Maturity Date
1	Sukumar Sebait	BNP15200099	22/01/2011	72000	100000	21/01/2014
2	Sukumar Sebait	BNP152D00397	20/06/2012	240000	290000	19/06/2014
3	Sukumar Sebait	BNP15200022	20/10/2011	86400	120000	19/10/2014
4	Sukumar Sebait	AB8796	ANGEL CO.	50000	50000	16/02/2015
5	Sukumar Sebait	Ab8904	ANGEL CO.	200000	200000	19/02/2015
6	Sukumar Sebait	Ab14004	ANGEL CO.	50000	50000	26/04/2015
7	Sukumar Sebait	152MID-010205082	ANGEL CO.	200000	200000	27/12/2015
8	Sukumar Sebait	152MID-010221226	ANGEL CO.	100000	100000	19/01/2016
9	Sukumar Sebait	152MID-010253608	ANGEL CO.	100000	100000	19/03/2016

                                    

The Complainant has therefore approached this Commission claiming total principle amount of Rs. 10,98,400/- with maturity value including interest.

                                                                                                                                                                                  Contd……p/2

Page:2

O.P. contested the case contending inter alia that the instant case is barred by limitation and that the Commission has no jurisdiction to pass any order in this matter which is pending before the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta.                                                         

-: Decision with reasons: -

Having regard to the facts of the case, submission, contention and documents on both sides the Commission finds that the Complainant has invested with O.P. with the hope of getting the principle amount of Rs.10,98,400/- with maturity value including interest but the O.P. has committed breach of contract in returning the investment money in due time. These are all investments created under bilateral contract by and between the parties and the O.P. is bound to repay the investment amount to the Complainant according to the terms and condition of the contract.

It is contended by the Ld. Advocate for the O.P. that the maturity date of all the investments  date back to the Year-2015 but the instant case has been filed in 2023 long after the period of limitation of two years as prescribed u/s 69 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and as  such the complaint case is liable to be dismissed on limitation point.

But as stated above failure of payment of investment money on the part of O.P. is a breach of contract and accordingly Section 22 of Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply which provides that in the case of continuing breach of contract or in the case of a continuing tort a fresh period of limitation begins to run at every moment of the time during which the breach or the tort as the case may be continues. Cause of action appearing in Section 34 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has not been defined in the Act but the Consumer dispute has been defined in Section 2 (8) of the said Act which says that Consumer dispute means a dispute where the person against whom a complaint has  been  made denies or  disputes the allegations contained in the complaint. No such denial of investment in question of the Complainant has been made in the written version or at any earlier point of time. In absence of any denial or dispute of the claim of the Complainant by the O.P. cause of action of the instant case cannot be taken to start at any earlier point of time prior to the filing of the case. In this case the cause of action is continuing one and the period of limitation shall not apply to the case for the reasons stated above.

Pendency of matter before the Hon’ble High Court and Justice Talukdar Committee constituted by the Hon’ble High Court with regard to the disposal of the property of O.P. and the disbursement thereof to the investors like the Complainant will not stand as a legal bar to proceed with this case to pass an order against the O.P. for return of the matured amount to the Complainant. Accordingly the case succeeds.

                                                                                                                                                                                        Contd……p/3

Page:3

Hence it is ordered……..

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest but without cost.

O.P. is directed to pay to the Complainant the principle amount of Rs.10,98,400/- plus Rs.50,000/- corresponding to Certificate No.152-MID-010253608 with maturity amount  Rs.1,50,000/- in place of Rs.1,00,000/- as wrongly inserted in the petition of Complaint within a period of two months from this date I/D law will take its own course. Liberty is given to the Complainant to approach Justice Talukdar Committee constituted by the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta in connection with W.P. 15265 of 2015 and W.P. 240 of 2016 for recovery of the decretal amount unless and until directed otherwise by Justice Talukdar Committee.

Both parties be supplied copy of this order free of cost.

 

 ____________________                _________________         

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT           HON’BLE MEMBER