Orissa

Rayagada

CC/57/2016

Suman Kumar Patnaik - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Director Seven Hills Plantation - Opp.Party(s)

Self

20 Jan 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

                                                            C.C. Case  No.57/ 2016

                                                                       

 P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

Sri Gadadhara Sahu,B.Sc.,                                    Member

Suman Kumar Patnaik,S/o Sri Gagan hand Patnaik, Resident of Gayatri Nagar,2^nd Ln, At/Po/Dist. Rayagada.                                                                                                                                                                                                                   …….Complainant

                                                            Vrs.

Managing Director, Seven Hills Plantations Pvt. Ltd., Dharma Nagar, AT/Po Berhampour,Dist.Ganjam,Odisha.                                                                                                                                                                              …..Opp.Party

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant: Sri N.K.Kanta & Associate Advocate , Rayagada.

For the O.P: Sri S.M.Mohapatra & Associate Advocate, Berhampur.

                                                                            JUDGMENT

                        The facts of the  case  is that  the complaint  has invested Rs.1,000/-  on the OP Company  on 29.07.1993 through Bank Draft vide BD No.544627 and the OP issued money receipt  in the name of Gagan Chand Patnaik vide MR NO.2108 and the OP issued a Certificate  .In the year 2013  the tern  of the investment was completed  and the complainant and his father visited the office of the OP  and met with him and the OPP assured  them to pay Rs75,000/-  as per the certificate but  fail to pay the amount  .The complainant visited various times to the office of the OP but the OP delaying the same with some pretext or other. Hence, prayed to  direct the OP  to pay the maturity amount of Rs.75,000/-  with interest and award compensation for mental agony and cost of litigation. Hence, this complaint.

                        Being noticed by this forum the opposite party   appeared through advocate  and  filed  written version inter alia denying the petition allegations on all its material particulars. It is submitted by the OP that the complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of C.P.Act  and further any investment to earn higher rate of interest does not come within the definition of consumer  and the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain such claim.  The claim of the complainant is barred by limitation and hence the case of the complainant should be rejected.

                                                                        F I N D I N G S

                        We perused the documents filed by the complainant. The complainant has invested Rs.1,000/- with the OP Company on 29.07.1993 through Bank. It is also not denied by the OP. In the year 2013 the terms of the investment was completed. At this stage we hold that if the OP failed to refund the amount as  assured  by them it can be presumed that the OP is  in capable to provide such service and only given the receipt to collect the money from the complainant. For which the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price as per their assurance and  also the complainant is entitled  and has a right to claim compensation and cost  to meet  his mental agony and financial loss. In the instance case, it appears that the complainant has filed only the receipt of the payment and letter dt.24.08.1993 of the Ops. It appears that the complainant invested a substantial amount with an exception to have the effective benefit of use of the same. But he is  unable to produce any substantial document in support of  approaches to the Ops from 1993  or from the date of completion of terms of the investment.

                        As the claim of the complainant is completely barred by limitation as contemplated U/s 24 A of the C.P.Act this clearly shows the carelessness  of the complainant. After gap of long period over and above limitation period. However, taking the lenient view we accept the petition of the complainant. Hence, it is ordered.

                                                                              ORDER

                        The  opposite party  is directed to refund the deposited amount of Rs.1,000/-  paid by the complainant with 10%  interest per annum from the date of deposit within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the O.P is  liable to pay  penal interest  @  2%  p.a. on the above awarded amount . Accordingly the complaint is allowed.

                        Pronounced in open forum today on this 30^th   day of December,2016 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                         A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

 

 

                                    Member                                                              President