Haryana

Ambala

CC/186/2020

Prachi Sobti - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Nationalised Banks Employees and other Co Operative - Opp.Party(s)

30 Sep 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case no.         :    186 of 2020

                                                          Date of Institution           :     09.09.2020

                                                          Date of decision    :     30.09.2022.

 

Prachi Sobti, aged about 7 years, minor daughter of Sh. Sumit Sobti, minor through her father, next friend, guardian adlitem Sumit Sobti son of late Sh.Om Parkash, resident of village Tamnoli, Tehsil Barara, District Ambala at present residing at House No.UUC 90, Breadrath Road, Opposite Naaz Cinema, Jalandhar City, Punjab.         

                                                                                 ……. Complainant.

                                                Versus

1. The Nationalised Banks Employees and other Public Co-Operative T. & C. Society Ltd. Naraingarh (Ambala) through its President/authorized signatory.
2. Kuldeep Kumar son of Sh.Krishan Lal, resident of village Dera Kharwan, District Yamuna Nagar, President of The Nationalised Banks Employees and other Public Co-Operative T. & C. Society Ltd. Naraingarh (Ambala)
3. Sunil Dhiman son of Sh.Balbir Dev, resident of Sector 7, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar, Vice- President of The Nationalised Banks Employees and other Public Co-Operative T. & C. Society Ltd. Naraingarh (Ambala).
4. Risal Chand son of Sh.Moli Ram, resident of HUDA Sector 7, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar, Cashier of The Nationalised Banks Employees and other Public Co-Operative T. & C. Society Ltd. Naraingarh (Ambala).

                                                                                       ….….Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

                   Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.         

                            

Present:       Shri Sandeep Misra, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

OPs No.1 to 4 already ex parte.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

(i) To pay the maturity amount of Rs.2,00,000/- of the FDR including interest @ 12% to the complainant alongwith upto date interest with immediate effect.

(ii) To pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of loss, harassment, pain, agony suffered by the complainant.

(iii) To pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses.

                                      OR

Grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit.

2.                 Brief facts of this case are that the complainant- Prachi Sobti is minor and as such the present complaint has been filed through her father- Sh.Sumit Sobit. In the years 2014-2015, the father of the complainant had sold his land situated in village Tamnoli, Tehsil Barara, District Ambala to the wife of the OP No.3, namely Suman Dhiman. At the time of selling the said land, OP No.3 had told that he is the vice-president of OP No.1 and if the complainant deposits the said sale consideration of land or other amounts, he will earns more profit and also handsome interest every month. Believing the promises and assurances given by the OPs to the father of the complainant deposited an amount of Rs.1 lac in the shape of FDR in the name of his minor daughter with the OPs vide FDR No.53884 dated 29.8.2014, which was to mature on 29.8.2020. However, after the maturity date, when the complainant contacted the OPs, they failed to pay the maturity amount and lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other. Few days ago when the complainant again approached the OPs and requested them to pay the maturity amount aforesaid, they told that they have closed down their office and as such, refused to pay the said maturity amount to the complainant.  Hence, the present complaint.  

3.                Upon notice, none has appeared on behalf of the OPs No.1 to 4 before this Commission, therefore, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 03.01.2022 and 30.05.2022.

4.                Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of Sumit Sobti son of Om Parkash, R/o Village Tamnoli, Tehsil Barara, District Ambala now resident of H.No.UUC90, Breadrath Road, Opposite Naaz Cinema, Jalandhar City (Pb.) as Annexure CA alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have carefully gone through the case file.

6.                Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that after maturity of the FDRs complainant approach the OP to get the maturity amount but the OPs refuse to pay the maturity amount. By doing so, the OPs have not only committed deficiency in service but also indulged into unfair trade practice.

7.                It may be stated here that bare perusal of copy of FDR No.53884 Annexure C-1 reveals that an amount of Rs.1 lac stood received by the OPs in the name of Prachi Sobti through her father Sumit Sobti, she being minor, which got matured on 29.08.2020, with maturity value of Rs.2 lacs. However, as per the version of Sumit Sobti-father/natural guardian of the minor-complainant, which is supported by his affidavit, the said amount has not been paid by the OPs and that now they have refused to pay the same.

8.                It is significant to mention here that notice of this complaint was sent to OPs seeking their version of the case filed by the complainant. However, nobody appeared on behalf of the OPs, despite service, therefore, they were proceeded ex-parte, in the above stated manner. This act of the OPs draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of the OPs shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the allegations made by the complainant, through her father. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant, through her father, went unrebutted & uncontroverted.

9.           Resultantly, we allow this complaint against the OPs and they jointly and severally are directed as under:-

1. To pay the maturity amount of Rs.2 lacs to the complainant alongwith interest @4% p.a. from the date of maturity, till realisation.
2. To pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.
3. To pay Rs.3,000/- as litigation expenses.

 

The OPs are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, failing which the OPs shall pay interest @ 6% per annum on the awarded amount besides litigation costs, from the date of default, till realisation. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on: 30.09.2022.

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)        (Ruby Sharma)                   (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                               Member                President