The case of the complainant in a nutshell is that the Complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh) only under MIS scheme of the opposite parties. The detail of the deposit under MIS scheme is as follows:
Sl. No. | Certificate No. & Customer ID | Deposited Date | Deposited Amount | Maturity Date | Maturity Amount | Interest Paid out of 36 months | Interest due out of 36 months | Total amount of interest due |
1. | TA02762771 TYY0065762 | 31.01.2015 | Rs.1,00,000/- | 31.01.2018 | Rs.1,00,000/- | 5 months | 31 months | Rs.35,000/- |
It is the further case of the complainant that on maturity of the fixed deposit the complainant requested the opposite parties to pay the maturity amount along with interest of 31 months to him but the opposite parties did not pay any heed to it. Being disappointed and harassed the complainant sent a letter dated 21.09.2020 to the opposite parties for refund of the matured amount but till date she has not received any reply from their end. According to the complainant the opposite parties are liable for gross negligence and deficiency of service and she is entitled to receive the maturity amount with interest and compensation for harassment to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) only.
In spite of service of notice, the opposite parties did not appear in the case to contest the same. So, the case was heard ex parte as against all the opposite parties.
We find from the record that the complainant on 20.05.2022 filed her evidence on affidavit. Paragraph 2 of the evidence on affidavit dated 20.05.2022 is reproduced below:
“That I filed the complaint along with all supporting documents by proper affidavit and this will be treated as an affidavit of evidence and any document is needed in support of my complaint I am duty bound to submit before your lordship at the time of hearing or in the mean time on direction”.
Now let us consider whether any pleading can be accepted as evidence in a case.
Section 38 (9) (c) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 runs as follows:
‘For the purpose of this section, the District Commission shall have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) while trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely – ‘
‘‘(a) …………………
(b) ………………
(c) Receiving of evidence on affidavits
(d) …………….
(e) ……………..
(f)…………….’’
We find that the complainant in her evidence on affidavit dated 20.05.2022 stated to treat the pleading of her complaint case as evidence which is not permissible in law. No original document has been submitted in proof that the complainant deposited Rs.1,00,000/- only with the opposite parties under MIS scheme on 31.01.2015.
Therefore, we are of the opinion that no evidence has been submitted by the complainant on affidavit to prove the pleading of her case. Opportunity was given to the complainant to submit further evidence and original document if any. In spite of that the complainant has not filed any further evidence in this case neither appeared today for argument. No Brief Note of Argument also filed by her. Moreover, we find the case is barred by limitation.
In view of the discussion made above it is crystal clear that there is no iota of evidence to prove the case of the complainant. As such the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
Therefore, the case of the complainant fails.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
that the Complaint Case be and the same is dismissed ex pate without cost.
Let a copy of this judgement be supplied to the complainant free of cost.
