The Complainant has filed this case  against the O.P’s under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019  and praying for following relief / reliefs :-

1. Direction against the O.P’s. for making payment of Rs. 975/- to the Complainant as demanded legitimately by the Complainant as overdue interest accrued on the principal maturity amount of Rs. 44,612.20P from 10.01.2022 to 03.03.22(53 Days) jointly or severally.
2. Direction against the O.P’s. for making payment of Rs. 3,00,000/- for adopting deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in adopted by the O.P’s.
3. Direction against the O.P’s. for making payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- for suffering,  financial loss, mental pain and agony sustained by the Complainant due to the acts of the O.P’s. jointly or severally.
4. Cost of litigation Rs. 20,000/-
5. Any other relief or reliefs.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

1. The Complainant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the Cause Title of this Case/ Complainant is a senior citizen has been suffering from age related ailments.

2. That the Complainant being impressed with the Advertisement and lucrative offer on the part of the OP’s which is Financial Company Limited running its business in the name and style L & T Infra incorporate under the Companies Act, 1956 and the Complainant purchased 20 Nos. of Debenture Bonds @ Rs. 1,000/- each vide Registered Folio No. 20984368, Certificate No. 253851 Debentures Nos. Started from 2569890 to 2569909 (20) on 10.01.2022 which was supposed to be matured on 10.01.2022 i.e. the Bounds had been fixed for 10 Years.

3. That according to the Complainant he was supposed to be got its maturity value of the Debenture Bonds in his Bank Account directly on behalf of the O.P. No. 1 after the completion of the tenure of maturity on 14.01.2022 / the Complainant had received one cheque Vide NO. 205035 after deducting Tax Deduction at source (T D S) for Rs. 44,612.20 P from the O.P. No. 2 / The agent or R T A  i.e. Registrar Transferring Authority in the name of Bimal Kanti Rao / on several times the Complainant tried to contact the O.P. No. 2 over telephone and subsequently e-mail ventilating the observation and requested the O.P. No. 2 disclosing the Bond Holders Name- Bimal Kanti Roy and Cheque Drawn in the name of Bimal Kanti Rao and intimate the Bank and stop payment of Cheque No. 205035 / asked to credit the amount to Bank Account as per application form on receipt / No of Bank Branch of Indusind Bank Limited at Jalpaiguri  / cancelled cheque / in the said e-mail the Complainant also gave his Mobile No. 8900422326 dt. 15.01.2022 but all the efforts were in vain.

4. That the Complainant having in mind assured acceptance of matured amount he had issued some cheques to some individuals but due to non-payment of the said amount he had to loss for non clearance of cheques on his part to others.

5. That the Complainant sent one communication through Registered Post to the O.P. No. 2 on 24.01.2022 claiming interest for overdue period inter-alia  the other grievances which the Complainant had to face.

6. That the Communication dt. 24.01.2022 was duly delivered to the O.P. No. 2 on 29.01.2022 as the same was seen by the Complainant from the Head Post Office wherefrom the Communication was posted by the Personnel of the Concern Head Post Office, Jalpaiguri, but the O.P. No. 2 paid no heed to the Complainant till 03.03.2022.

7. That on 04.03.2022 the Complainant found that an amount of Rs. 44,612.20P only had been credited in his  account lying to the Central Bank of India, Kolkata Branch.

8. That a sum of Rs. 975/- @ 15 %  per annum from 10.01.2022 (Date of Maturity of Bonds) to 03.03.2022  (Payment not carrying with overdue interest) has been kept unpaid from the O.P. No. 2 to the Complainant accrued from Maturity Amount of Rs. 44,612.20P till date of payment of the said principal of Rs. 44,612.20P.

9. That the Complainant sent one Communication to the O.P.  No. 1 stating all the grievances for non-payment of said over dues amount dt. 30.04.2022 by Registered Post which was delivered to the O.P. No. 1 on 04.05.2022 and the Complainant demanded compensation of Rs. 10,000/- but till today the same has not been paid by the O.P. and act all the O.P’s were  unfair trade practice & deficiency in service by causing pecuniary loss to the Complainant depriving him from his legitimate claim over dues of Rs. 975/- and which also caused mental pain and agony and harassment of the Complainant.

10. That the cause of action of this case firstly arose on 10.01.2024 (the date of maturity of bonds), secondly on 14.01.2022 ( the date of receipt of the cheque by  the Complainant which was send by the O.P. No. 2 in his wrong name), thirdly on 24.01.2022 (the date of Communication by the Complainant to the O.P. No. 2), fourthly on 04.03.2022 ( the date of payment of Rs. 44,612.20 as principal amount to the Complainant by the O.P. No. 2), fifthly on 30.04.2022 ( the date on which the Complainant sent Complaint to the O.P. No. 1), Sixthly on 04.05.2022 (the date of delivery of said Communication ) and finally on 20.05.2022 ( the date of which the stipulated time given in the said communication elapsed and the same is continuing till today within the jurisdiction of this Commission.

In support of the Complaint the Complainant has filed the following documents:-

1. Copy of application dated 21.12.11 by the Complainant to the O.P. No. 1.
2. Copy of confirmation by the O.P-1 to the Complainant dt. 19.01.13.
3. Copy of Bond of Debentures in the name of Complainant Bimal Kanti Roy as holders of the Bond under Registered Folio No. 20984368 corresponding to Certificate No. 253851, in series No. 2, No. of Debentures 20, Distinctive No. 256 9890-2569909=20, date of allotment 10.01.12.
4. Copy of reference of e-mail by the complainant to the OP-2.
5. Copy of communication under Regd. Post in hand written by the complainant to the OP No. 2 dated 24.01.22.
6. Copy of Postal Receipt dt. 24.01.22 in support of communication dt. 24.01.22 in support of serial No. 5 above.
7. Copy of communication of grievances by the complainant to the Op- 1 by Regd. Post dt. 30.04.2022.
8. Copy of Postal Receipt dt. 30.04.22 in support of communication dt.30.04.22 in support of serial No. 7 above.
9. Copy of Track Consignment of P O D Booked on 30.04.22 containing the grievances of the complainant in a communication dt. 30.04.22 and eventing the confirmation of item delivery dt. 04.05.22 in support of Sl No. 7 above.

Notice was sent from this Commission for serving the same on the O.P’s. On receipt of notice both the O.P’s. have appeared before thisCommission through Vokalatnama,filed their Written Version and denied all the material allegations of the Complainant. In the Written Version the O.P’s have stated that the O.P. No. 1 has its Registered Office in Kolkata under P.S. Bidhannagar, District 24- Parganas (N), and its corporate Office at Mumbai and the O.P. No. 2 is Private Limited Company / both the O.P’s have denies all the allegations/ averment or contention contained in the Complaint and denied the same. They have also stated in the Written Version that the O.P. No. 2 was appointed as Registrar and Transfer agent of O.P. No. 1 and provide Registrar and Transfer Agent (R T A) to the O.P. No. 1with the effect from 2016 / the O.P. No. 1 provides bonds to the customers and the O.P. No. 2 keeps and maintain all the records of O.P. No. 1 Company and provide support in back office work related to Bond Scheme issued by the O.P. No. 1 Company. It is also stated that the O.P. No. 2 merely acts as an agent of the O.P. No. 1 and it is fact that the Complainantpurchased20 debenture bonds @ Rs. 1,000/- each with Registered folio no. 20984368, Certificate No. 253851, Debenture Nos. 2569809 – 2569909 on 10.01.2022 which matured on 10.01.2022 and the O.P’s. have issued maturity warrant in the name of Bimal Kanti Roy bearing no. 98453 amounting to Rs. 44612.20 was dispatched through speed post vide tracking no EM875114533IN to the Complainant’sregistered address on 10.01.2022 and the same has not been returned as undelivered by the Postal Authorities, issued cheque in the name of investor as registered in records. (The copy of folio record marked and annexed as Annexure- A) .The O.P. No. 1 & 2 have also stated in the Written Version that, as per copy of application form it does not mention IFSC Code and copy of the application annexed by the Complainant is deferent from the records in the Company which needs to prove through strict evidence. (Copy of application form No. 32288666 marked and annexed as Annexure B). They have also stated that, they issued the maturity warrantwithout any delay or without any deficiency of service,sent to the Complainant and thereafter, on receipt of first communication from the investor for revalidation of maturity warrant on 01.02.2022 due to incorrect name in records both the O.P. No. 1 & 2 had taken coercive actions and also responded vide letterdated 26.02.2022 and payment had been credited in the account provided by the Complainant beingCentral Bank of India A/C No. 120952052on 04.03.2022 vide UTR No. INDBN04031831449 and there was no deficiency of service on the part of the O.P’s. It is also stated by the O.P’s. that the Complainant is not a Consumer as per definition of Consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the O.P. No. 1 has already make payment of Complainant on 10.01.2022 which is on time and that’s why there was no delay on the part of the O.P. No. 1 & 2 and there was no cause of action against the O.P’s and the complainant has filed this case which deserves to be dismissed. It is further stated by the O.P’s that the O.P. No. 2 only provides services to the clients of O.P. No. 1 and maintain update the records of bond holders of the clients and replied to all the correspondence, dispatched the warrants on behalf of the O.P. No. 1 and the O.P. No. 2 has replied to all the letters sent by the Complainant and the O.P. No. 1 received the first communication letter from the Complainant for revalidation of maturity warrant on 01.02.2022 for which the O.P. No. 2 being the service provider of the O.P. No. 1 responded to the letter vide letter dated 26.02.2022 and accordingly the payment had also been credited in Central Bank of India account being A/C No. 120952052 on 04.03.2022vide UTR NO. INDBN04031831449 and in the said letter it was clearly mentioned that the dividend was unpaid as on date and the instruction was given to the dividend bankers to directly credited the said amount to the Bank Account which was provided by the Complainant to the O.P’s. (Copy of letter dt. 26.02.2022 is marked or annexed as Annexure C). / The O.P. No. 2 after receiving the next communication letter from the Complainant replied the same dated 30.05.2022 for overdue interest on maturity payment on 18.05.2022and as per the Company’s norms up to interestamount of Rs. 5,000/- per financial year no TDS will be deducted as follows:-10 % if PAN details are furnished and who had not furnished PAN details 20 % TDS requires to be deducted & that’s why the TDS of Rs. 2735/- had been deducted for the portfolio purchased by the complainant and the interest payment / redemption payment for Rs. 44612.20/- was processed on the Bank Account of the Complainant through N E F Tbearing account no. 1209512052 after deduction of T D S on 10.01.2022. The O.P’s. have also statedthat they did not receive FORM 15G/H for non-deduction of T D S on 10.01.2022 and that’s why TDS was deducted on interest / maturity payment and vide letter dt. 30.05.2022 the same fact was intimated to the Complainant and the T D S amount which was deducted will automatically reflect under 26 AS and the said deducted amount will be refunded by the Income-tax Department and the T D S OF 10 % was deducted. (The Copy of the letter dated 30.05.2022 is marked and annexed as Annexure D). The O.P’s have also stated that the contents of the Complaint is misconceived and not maintainable under Consumer Protection Act and the Complaint deserves to be dismissed and the Complainant has not approached the Commission with clean hands and by suppressing the material facts he filed this case and thereby the Complainant is not entitled any relief from the this Commission. By filing the Written Version the O.P’s have prayed for dismissal of this Case.

Having heard, the Ld. Advocate of both the side and on perusal of the Complaint, Written Version and Documents filed by the parties the following points are taken to be considered by this Commission.

Points for consideration :-

1. Whether the Complainant is a Consumer?
2. Whether the case is maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act 2019?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P’s. as alleged by the Complainant?
4. Whether the Complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?                                          

 Decision with reasons

All the points are taken up together for discussion to avoid unnecessary repetition and for the sake of convenience and brevity of this case.

Complainant was given liberty to file evidence to prove his case. To prove the case the Complainant has filed Written Evidence in the form of an Affidavit. In the evidence filed by the complainant he has categorically corroborated the contents of its Written Complaint and has stated that, there was deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P’s. who deliberately did not issue the cheque/ maturity warrant in the actual name of the Complainant, despite in the application form the Complainant has specifically stated its name along with title properly.

Ld. Advocate of the Complainant has filed Brief Notes of Argument. During hearing of argument Ld. Advocate of the Complainant argued that, the Complainant has been able to prove its case against the O.P’s not only by filing evidence-on-affidavit but also by filing several documents before this Commission. It is also argument of the Complainant that, in the reply given by the O.P’s against the questionnaires of the Complainant they have admitted the case of the Complainant and that’s why the Complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

To falsify the case of  the Complainant Ld. Advocate of the O.Ps. have filed Evidence in Chief through Abhijit Das in the form of an Affidavit. In the Written Evidence the O.Ps have denied all the allegations of the Complainant and have stated that, the Complainant has filed this case by suppressing the actual fact after getting the matured amount from them. In the Written Evidence it is also stated that, the Complainant purchased 20 Nos. of Debenture Bonds @ Rs. 1,000/- each being Registered Folio Nos. 20984368 Certificate No. 253851, Debenture No- 2569809 – 2569909 on 10.01.2012 which matured on 10.01.2022 and the O.P. Company has issued maturity warrant in the name of Bimal Kanti Rao being Warrant No. 98453 amounting to Rs. 44612.20 which was dispatched through Speed Post in the Registered address of Bimal Kanti Rao on 10.01.2022 / It was not returned as undelivered by the Postal Authority and thereafter the complainant issued a letter and on receipt of the first communication from the Complainant they paid maturity amount to the Complainant by crediting in the account of the Complainant being account no. 120952052 on 04.03.2022 vide UTR No. – INDBN0431831449 and that’s why there was no deficiency of service on their part. It is also stated by the O.P’s. in their evidence that, the Complainant is not a consumer as per definition of consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. It is also stated in their evidence that, the Complainant has not approached before this Commission with clean hands and by suppression of material facts he filed this case for unlawful gain and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

At the time of hearing of argument Ld. Advocate of the O.P’s No. 1 & 2 argued that, they have already filed Brief Notes of Argument and stated everything. It is also argued on the side of the O.P’s. that, the Complainant has failed to prove this case against the O.P’s and he is not entitled to any relief as claimed. It is also argument of the O.P’s that, the O.P. Company on 10.01.2022 issued maturity warrant in the name of the complainant with Reference No. 98453 for the sum of Rs. 44612.20 and the warrant was duly dispatched to the Registered Address of the Complainant. It is also argument of the O.P’s that, on 14.01.2022 the Complainant received the cheque being No. 205035 for Rs. 44612.20 from the O.P. after deduction of tax at source TDS and the Cheque was issued in the name of the Complainant but the Complainant on 15.01.2022 made correspondence with the O.P. No. 2 via e-mail stating error in the name printed on the Cheque and due to such error. The Cheque was not honored and subsequently on 04.03.2022 an amount of Rs. 44,612.20 was credited in the account of the Complainant lying at the Central Bank of India, Kolkata Branch by the O.P’s and thereafter the Complainant has filed this case for non-payment of Rs. 975 ( interest). It is also argument of the O.P’s that as they have already paid the maturity amount of Debenture Bond in the account of the Complainant which was acknowledged by the Complainant there was no deficiency of service on their part. Ld. Advocate of the O.P’s praying for dismissal of this case.

Having heard, the Ld. Advocate of both the side and on perusal of the entire record including the evidence of the parties as well as their documents including Brief Notes of Arguments it is admitted fact that the Complainant had purchased 20 Nos. of Debenture Bonds from the O.P. Company  at the price of Rs. 1,000/- each.

It is also admitted facts that, the date of maturity of those Debenture Bonds was on 10.01.2022 but the maturity amount of the Debenture Bonds were not credited in the account of the Complainant. It is further admitted fact of the O.P. that, they credited the maturity amount of those 20 Nos. of Debenture Bonds on 04.03.2022 by crediting the same in the Account of the Complainant at the Central Bank of India, Kolkata Branch.

Only dispute in this case is that, as to whether the Complainant is entitled to get Rs. 975/- from the O.P’s. towards interest for crediting the maturity amount not within time or not ?

 On perusal of the entire record it is admitted fact by both the parties that, the date of maturity of the Debenture Bonds were on 10.01.2022. From the record it further reveals that, the maturity amount has duly been credited by the O.P’s on 04.03.202 in the account of the Complainant. It is not explained by the O.P. Company as to what prevented them to pay the maturity amount to the Complainant on 10.01.2022. It is needless to mention here that, the O.P. Company has not stated anything as to why they did not pay any interest on the said maturity amount from 10.01.2022 to 03.03.2022. It is not explained on the side of the O.P. Company as to why they praying for exemption from making payment of interest to the Complainant for the period from 10.01.2022 to 03.03.2022.

Considering all we are of the view that the Complainant has been able to prove its case to the effect that, there was deficiency of service on the part of the O.P’s who issued a Cheque in favour of the Complainant by writing wrong title i.e. Rao instead of Roy.

Complainant has also been able to prove its case against the O.P’s to the effect that, he is entitled to get interest from the OP’s for the period from 10.01.2022 to 03.03.2022. We are also of the view that, the O.P’s cannot evade making payment of interest on the maturity amount with effect from 10.01.2022 to 03.03.2022 to the Complainant.

Both the O.P’s. are jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount to the Complainant. 

Hence it is therefore,

                                       ORDERED

That, the instant Consumer Case being No. 15/2023 is hereby allowed on contest against the O.P’s but in part. The O.P’s are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 975/- (Rupees Nine Hundred Seventy Five) Only to the Complainant towards interest.

The O.Ps are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) Only to the Complainant towards deficiency of service and also for causing sufferings, financial loss, mental pain and agony sustained by the Complainant due to the acts of the O.P’s.

The O.P’s are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only to the Complainant towards the cost of legal proceedings and the O.P’s are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission.

The O.P’s are also directed to pay interest @ 4 % p.a. to the Complainant on the awarded amount with effect from the date of filing of this case (13.04.2023) till making payment of the entire amount.

The O.P’s are directed to pay the awarded amount within 45 days  from the date of this order, failing which the Complainant will have the liberty to take proper steps against the O.P. as per law.

Let a copy of this Order / Judgement be given to the parties free of cost.