Date of filing :16.10.2017

Judgment : Dt.9.3.2018

Mr. Ayan Sinha, Member

            This is a complaint under Section 12 of C.P.Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) made by Ranjan Kumar Gupta, 12A, Jagat Roy Chowdhury Road, P.S.-Thakurpukur, Kolkata-700 008, against the Director, Alchemist Township India Ltd, Building 23, Behru Place, Near Allahabad Bank, New Delhi-110 019, OP No.1 and The Branch Manager, Alchemist Township India Ltd., 145A, Diamond Harbour Road, 2^nd floor, P.S.-Thakurpukur, Kolkata-700 008 (OP No.2) praying for directions upon the OPs to refund maturity amount of Rs.20,000/- and to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- along with litigation costs of Rs.8,000/-.

            Fact in brief are that Complainant being satisfied with the goodwill of OP No.1 who runs business for marketing Real Estate and other similar type of products and OP No.2 is the branch office of OP No.1, deposited a total sum of Rs.20,000/- as fixed deposits with OP No.1 through OP No.2 against which two certificates No.TA00779403 and TA01213830 were issued by OPs and both were surrendered at the office of OP No.2 on 21.8.2015 for returning the maturity amount. Thereafter, the OPs remained silent to refund the maturity amount even after receipt of letters.

            Since the OPs failed and neglected to return the maturity value of deposits, so Complainant filed this case.

            Notices were served upon OPs. OP No.1 appeared by filing vakalatnama and also filed a petition challenging trhe maintainability of this case but did not file written version. Finally, the case proceeded ex-parte against OPs vide Order No.8 dt.13.2.2018. Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief wherein he has reiterated the facts as mentioned in the complaint petition. Complainant has also mentioned in his petition of complaint that he filed earlier same matter earlier being No.CC/310/2017 which was dismissed by this Forum on 11.9.2017 for default.

            Main points for determinations

1. Whether Complainant is a consumer?
2. Whether there is a deficiency of service upon OPs?
3. Whether the Complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons

On perusal of the documents filed by Complainant, it appears that OPs issued two certificates No.TA00779403 & TA01213830 which reveal that Complainant was to be refunded not less than Rs.10,000/- and Rs.10,000/- on 20.10.2015 and 30.12.2015respectively. In this regard, Complainant has filed both Xerox copies of surrendered certificates duly received by OP with seal and signature but did not file any copies of money receipts issued by OPs.

      It also appears that Complainant has mentioned in his petition of complaint (Para 3) that he deposited total Rs.20,000/- and in same para he has mentioned that he deposited Rs.5,000/- and Rs.5,000/- and the maturity for the same is Rs.10,000/- and Rs.10,000/-.

      Although Complainant has not filed any money receipts issued by OPs, but it can be well considered that Complainant has paid money to OPs otherwise OPs would not have issued two certificates bearing No.TA00779403 & TA01213830 in favour of Complainant stating clearly that Complainant has booked for a plot/villa/apartment and in the event of non-acceptance he is entitled to be refunded not less than Rs,.10,000/- and Rs.10,000/- respectively on maturity and as such Complainant is a consumer.

      After the maturity dates, certificates were surrendered by Complainant on 21.8.2015 at the office of OP No.2 for refund of the maturity amount. In this regard he has submitted a copy for the same from where it reveals that OP has received back both the certificates with seal and signature. Thereafter, the OPs remained silent and neglected to redress the grievances. So, we hold there is deficiency of service upon OPs and Complainant is entitled to the reliefs. Thus (ii) and (iii) are answered accordingly.

      Complainant has also prayed for compensation of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.8,000/- as litigation costs.

      So we are of the view, if a direction be given upon OPs to pay Rs.20,000/- to the Complainant along with a compensation of Rs.5,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- justice would be served.

      Hence,

ordered

      CC/582/2017 and the same is allowed ex-parte in part.

      OPs are directed to pay Rs.20,000/- to the Complainant along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- in default the total amount shall carry interest @ 10%p.a. from the date of this order till full realisation.