Judgment : Dt.19.2.2018
Mr. Ayan Sinha, Member
This is a complaint under Section 12 of C.P.Act, 1986 made by one Mala Mazumdar (Complainant No.1) and Santosh Mazumder (Complainant No.2) both residing at 2/33, Mahendra Banerjee Road, Kolkata-700 060, P.S.-Parnasree against the Director, Alchemist Infra Realty Ltd., Unit No.GF-18, Ground floor, Omexe Square, Jasola Dist. Centre, South Delhi-110 025 (OP No.1) and the Branch Manager, Alchemist Infra Realty Ltd., 145A, Diamond Harbour Road, 2nd floor, Kolkata-700 008, P.S.-Thakurpukur praying for a direction upon the OP to return the maturity value of Rs.4,26,000/- and also a direction to pay a compensation of Rs.60,000/- for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.
Facts in brief are that the OP No.1 runs business for Marketing Real Estate and other similar type of products, and OP No.2 is the branch office of the OP No.1. Complainant No.2 is the husband of Complainant No1. Complainants jointly deposited a sum of Rs.2,13,000/- to OP No.1 through OP No.2 by a cheque No.297803 dt.26.8.2011 as fixed deposit for a period of 72 months and assured maturity return of deposit of Rs.4,26,000/- which was dt.27.8.2017. Therefore OP No.2 handed over a certificate of property No.AIRL/RD00418925 dt.17.9.2011 to petition No.1.
After the maturity the petitioner No.1 visited the branch office for enquiring the fate of maturity and found the office was closed. So, she wrote a letter on 5.9.2017 to OP No.1 requesting to return the maturity amount of Rs.4,26,000/- against which the OP remained silent to redress the grievances. The OPs neglected to return the money and thus the Complainants filed this case.
The OPs did not appear in this case by filing written version and so the case was heard ex-parte vide order No.6 dt.16.1.2018.
Main points for determination is (i) whether the Complainants are consumers, (ii) whether the Complainants are entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
Decision with reasons
Complainants have filed affidavit-in-chief wherein they have reiterated the facts as mentioned in the petition of complaint.
On perusal of the documents submitted by Complainant, it appears that Complainants have deposited jointly Rs.2,13,000/- against which a certificate of property No.AIRL/RD00418925 dt.17.9.2011 was issued by OP No.1 which clearly reveals that Complainants have paid Rs.2,13,000/- to OPs and as mentioned in the certificate within 3 years the expected value is not to be less than Rs.4,26,000/- which is surprisingly excessive. In this regard the original certificate of property No.AIRL/RD00418925 have been filed by Complainants. After the expiry of the term when Complainants requested the OPs for return of maturity but the OPs neglected and failed to return.
There is no dispute that Complainants have paid money to OPs and so Complainants are consumers.
Since the allegations of Complainants remained unchallenged and unrebutted, we are of the view that Complainants are entitled to the reliefs. Complainants have also prayed for compensation of Rs.60,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.
In our view, if we allow the maturity value of Rs.4,26,000/- to be paid to Complainants by OP, then we do not find justified for compensation costs. As per litigation costs is concerned, if we allow a sum of Rs.6,000/- then justice would be served.
Hence,
ordered
CC/595/2017 and the same is allowed ex-parte in part.
OPs are directed to pay Rs.4,26,000/- to the Complainants within two months of this order.
OPs are also directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.6,000/- to the Complainants.
In default, the total amount shall carry interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of this order till realisation.
The liabilities of OPs are joint and severally.
