DATE OF DISPOSAL: 25.01.2021.
Dr. Aswini Kumar Mohapatra,President:
The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant has filed this consumer complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Party (in short the O.P.) and for redressal of his grievance before this Forum.
2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he was working as a State Government employee and retired from the service on after attaining the ages of superannuation. The Opposite Party persuaded the complainant for deposit in the society for Rs.50,000/- only so as to receive highest profits. The complainant deposited sum of Rs.50,000/- on dated 17.05.2012 against which the O.P. though its’ Authorized Signatory issued the receipt No. GIMSM 101762430 dated 17.05.2012. The O.P. through its’ Chief Executive issued the cheque bearing No.004550 dated 03.10.2013drawn in Andhra Bank, Gosaninuagam, Berhampur, Dist: Ganjam for an amount of Rs.61,038/- only under account No.017211100001468. The complainant submitted the cheque on dated 03.10.2013 at State Bank of India, Medical College Campus, Berhampur, Dist: Ganjam for collection, since the complainant has the Saving Bank No.10134492542. The said State Bank of India, Berhampur sent the cheque dated 03.10.2013 to the Andhra Bank, Gosaninuagam Branch, Berhampur for necessary collection. The Andhra Bank, Gosaninuagam Berhampur in its letter dated 28.12.2013 intimated the State Bank of India, Berhampur stating as “Account Blocked”. The State Bank of India, MCC Branch, Berhampur informed the same to the complainant in its letter dated 28.12.2013. On receipt of the said intimation from the State Bank of India, the complainant rushed to the O.P. who in turn asked for payment of the full amount in cash. The complainant approached the O.P. daily in his office at Dharma Nagar 4th lane for the January 2014 to till date, but the O.P. in unfair trade practice harassed, causing mental agony. The complainant has incurred expenditure of Rs.1500/- above for running to the office of the O.P. daily three to four times by wasting time and labour. The complainant has been harassed physically at the old age causing mental agony for the unfair trade practice of the O.P. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to immediate payment of Rs.61,038/-with interest , compensation of Rs.25,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- in the best interest of justice.
3. Notice was issued to the Opposite Party and published daily newspaper “Anupam Bharat” dated 01.06.2017 but the O.P. did not appear and filed his written version on the date fixed as such the O.P. is set exparte on 23.10.2017.
4. On the date of hearing of the consumer complaint, the advocate for complainant is present. We heard argument from him for the complainant at length and perused the complaint petition, written argument and materials placed on the case record. In the instant case it reveals that the complainant had deposited Rs.50,000/- in O.P’s Credit Co-operative Society Limited, at Dharmanagar Berhampur Branch vide Money Receipt No. No.GIMSM101762430 dated 17.05.2012 for Rs.50,000/- and after the maturity the O.P. has issued an Andhra Bank cheque of Rs.61,038/- in favour of the complainant vide cheque No. 004550 dated 03.10.2013 for Rs.61,038/-. Further it reveals that the complainant deposited the said cheque in his S.B.I. Account No.10134492542 dated 03.10.2013 but the said Bank returned the said cheque with remarks that the account is blocked. Taking the sole testimony of the complainant as well as affidavit in to consideration, we accepted the contentions of the complainant as true. As such in our considered view the O.P. is negligent in rendering proper service to the complainant. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. Law is well settled in case of Mrs. Puneet Kaur versus Hindustan Financial Management Ltd. and others reported in 2003(1) CPR 274 where in the Hon’ble National CDR Commission, New Delhi has held that “Non payment of fixed deposit amount on its maturity by Financial Institution constitutes deficiency in service”.
In view of the above decision and the provisions of law, the complainant’s case is partly allowed on exparte against the O.P. The Opposite Party is directed to pay the maturity value of Rs.61,038/- (Rupees Sixty One Thousand Thirty Eight ) only to the complainant along with 8% interest per annum from the date of filing this case i.e. on 04.03.2014 within 60 days from receipt of this order. Further the O.P. is also directed to pay Rs.5000/- for compensation alongwith Rs.2000/- as costs of litigation to the complainant within the above stipulated period failing which all the dues shall carry 12% interest per annum.
The order is pronounced on this day of 25th January 2021 under the signature and seal of this Forum. The office is directed to supply copy of order to the concerned parties free of cost and a copy of same is to be sent to the server of www.confonet.nic.in for posting in internet and thereafter the file be consigned to record room.
