DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT
Complaint No. : 155 of 2019
Date of Institution : 24.06.2019
Date of Decision : 19.02.2020
Ram Pal aged about 35 years son of Buddhi Lal r/o Ward No.3, Green Enclave, Faridkot Raod, Kotkapura Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot.
...Complainant
Versus
- The Natioanl Co-op NAT Credit Society Ltd., Corp Office: 1st Floor, Opposite, Sunny Enclave, above HDFC Bank, Kharar-Chandigarh Road, Mohali-140301 through its authorized signatory/director.
- Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited, SCO No.46-47, Sector 9 C, Sector 32 D, Sector 32, Chandigarh through its authorized signatory/director.CIN No.U70101RJ2010PLC033717.
- Emerging India Infra and Developers Limited, Faridkot Road, Near Railway Track, Kotkapura District Faridkot, Punjab 151204, through its authorized signatory/Branch Manager.
........ OPs
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
cc no.155 of 2019
Quorum: Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,
Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member.
Present: Sh Avtar Krishan, Ld Counsel for Complainant,
OPs Exparte.
ORDER
(Ajit Aggarwal, President)
Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops seeking directions to make payment of Rs.75,264/-with interest besides Rs.20,000/-as compensation for harassment and mental agony alongwith litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/-.
2 Briefly stated the case of complainant is that OP-2 and 3 carry the business of real estate including development of group housing societies/commercial/residential colonies and they collect money from investors by way of opening the single and regular premium accounts and OP-1 is their sister concern. It is submitted that complainant started depositing Rs.1000/- per month with OP-2 and OP-3 in six years plan and on 6.07.2015, OP-2 and OP-3 deducted Rs.60,000/-from his amount without his consent for two years and issued Deposit Confirmation Receipt dated 10.07.2015 of OP-1 and gave date of maturity as 5.07.2017 with maturity value of Rs.75,264/- and thus, in this way, complainant deposited Rs.60,000/-with OPs on 6.07.2015 for two years, but on 18.07.2017 after the date of maturity, OPs did not make the
cc no.155 of 2019
payment. Complainant made several requests to Ops to make payment of Rs75,264/-of maturity value of his amount, but OPs did not do anything needful. All this act and conduct of OPs amounts to deficiency in service. Complainant has prayed for directing OPs to refund Rs.75,264/- with interest and has also prayed for compensation of Rs.20,000/- besides Rs.11,000/- as cost of litigation. Hence, the complaint.
3 The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 01.07.2019, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.
4 As per office report, notice issued to Ops through registered cover received back with report ‘Incomplete Address’ by Postal Authorities. As complainant did not have any other address of OPs, therefore, he moved an application for effecting service to OPs through publication. Application was allowed vide order dated 04.11.2019 and OPs were duly served through publication in vernacular newspapers, but despite repeated calls on date fixed, no body appeared in the Forum on behalf of OPs either in person or through counsel to defend the allegations levelled by complainant against them. Therefore, vide order dated 20.01.2020, both the Ops were proceeded against exparte.
5 Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in exparte evidence, affidavit of Kuldeep Singh/ complainant as Ex.C-1, and
cc no.155 of 2019
documents Ex C-2 to Ex C-5 and then, closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.
6 Ld Counsel for complainant vehementally argued that OP- 1 is the sister concern of OP-2 and 3 and they carry the business of real and they collect money from investors by way of opening the single. Complainant started depositing Rs.1000/- per month with OP-2 and OP-3 in six years plan and on 6.07.2015, OP-2 and OP-3 deducted Rs.60,000/-from his amount without his consent for two years and issued Deposit Confirmation Receipt dated 10.07.2015 of OP-1 and gave date of maturity as 5.07.2017 with maturity value of Rs.75,264/. Meaning thereby, complainant deposited Rs.60,000/-with OPs on 6.07.2015 for two years, but on 18.07.2017 after the date of maturity, OPs did not pay the payment of maturity value of Rs75,264/-, which amounts to deficiency in service. He has prayed for directing OPs to refund Rs.75,264/- with interest alongwith compensation and litigation expenses. Complainant has prayed for accepting the complaint.
7 We have heard the exparte arguments addressed by ld counsel for complainant and have also carefully gone through the record available on the file.
8 The case of the complainant is that OPs launched a project for developing a colony in Kotkapura and complainant started depositing Rs.1000/- per month with OP-2 and OP-3 in six years
cc no.155 of 2019
plan. Grievance of the complainant is that on 6.07.2015, OP-2 and OP-3 deducted Rs.60,000/-from his amount without his consent for two years and issued Deposit Confirmation Receipt dated 10.07.2015 of OP-1 and gave date of maturity as 5.07.2017 with maturity value of Rs.75,264/-, but after date of maturity on 18.07.2017, when complainant approached Ops to receive his maturity value of Rs.75,264/-, OPs refused to make payment of same. Complainant visited the offices of Ops at Kotkapura, Mohali and Chandigarh, but OPs did not make the payment of maturity value and flatly refused to pay the same. Despite repeated requests by complainant to Ops to make payment of Rs.75,264/-of maturity value of his amount, OPs did nothing to redress the grievance of complainant and it amounts to deficiency in service. On the other hand, there is no rebuttal from Ops side as all the opposite parties are exparte in present case.
9 In order to prove his pleadings, complainant has placed on record copy of document Ex C-2 which is copy of Deposit Confirmation Receipt dated 10.07.2015 that clarifies the submission of complainant that OPs deducted Rs.60,000/- from the account of complainant on 06.07.2015 and deposited the same for the period of twenty four months from 6.07.2015 to 5.07.2017 and date of maturity mentioned over this document is Rs.75,264/-. In his support he has also produced on record Ex C-3 copy of agreement, from which, it is clear that complainant was in agreement with Ops for six years. Ex C-4
cc no.155 of 2019
Renewal Subscription Receipt issued by Emerging India Infra An Developers Ltd further emphasizes on pleadings of complainant.
10 Ld counsel for complainant argued that all the transactions between complainant and Opposite parties were made in Kotkapura and payment regarding plot was also made to OPs at their Kotkapura office and agreement was also executed between the parties at Koktapura, which comes in District Faridkot within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. So, this Forum has jurisdiction to try and decide this complaint. As Deposit Confirmation Receipt issued by Ops for Rs.60,000/-is 6.07.2015 and maturity date for this amount is 5.07.2017, therefore, complainant has filed the present complaint within time of two years of completion of maturity date and it is within limitation. Moreover, it is observed that Deposit Confirmation Receipt dated 6.07.2015 is issued by National Co-op NAT Credit Society Ltd/OP-1 and it does not bear any reference or relevance with OP-2 and OP-3. There is no doubt that receipt for Rs.60,000/- is issued by OP-1 and this document further justifies that maturity value of Rs.75,264/- against principal amount of Rs.60,000/-is to be paid by OP-1. There seems to be no liability on the part of OP-2 and OP-3 in making payment of maturity value of Rs.75,264/-as receipt Ex C-2 is issued by OP-1 and therefore, only OP-1 is liable for making payment of maturity value to complainant.
cc no.155 of 2019
11 From the above discussion and documents produced by the ld counsel for complainant, we are fully convinced with the exparte arguments advanced by ld counsel for complainant. OPs are exparte in present case and there is no rebuttal from OPs side. Complainant has succeeded in proving his case. The act of OP-1 in not making payment of maturity value of Rs.75,264/-to complainant, amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of Ops.
12 From the careful perusal of the record and keeping in view the record produced and pleadings put forward by complainant counsel, this Forum is fully convinced with the exparte arguments advanced by ld counsel for complainant and is of considered opinion that OP-1 has been deficient in services and there is trade mal practice on the part of OP-1 in not making payment of maturity value of Rs.75,264/- to complainant. Hence, the present complaint is hereby allowed against OP-1 and it stands dismissed against OP-2 and OP-3. OP-1 is directed to make payment of maturity value of Rs.75,264/-to complainant with interest at the rate of 12% per anum from the date of maturity i.e 5.07.2017 till final realization. OP-1 is further directed to pay Rs.5,000/-as consolidated compensation to complainant for harassment and mental agony suffered by him as well as for litigation expenses incurred by him. Compliance of this order be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which
cc no.155 of 2019
complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 19.02.2020
(Param Pal Kaur) (Ajit Aggarwal)
Member President
