Facts of the complaint case in brief are that on 24.01.2012 the complainant purchased two fixed deposit certificate vide no. 351002798506 A/C No. 6038420034 and certificate No. 351002798507, A/C No. 60384200335 amounting to Rs. 10,000/- each, by way of paying the aforesaid amount of Rs. 10,000/- only to the opposite party with condition to get maturity value of 26,120/- each on 24.01.2020.The complainant purchased said fixed deposit certificate for the purpose of future security of her family. Due to some personal financial cricis the complainant wants to withdraw her above 2 (two) certificates by getting the pre-maturity payment of those certificate and the complainant submit claim prayer but the O.P. ignore it, in the meantime it becomes matured. After maturity on 24.01.2020 complainant went to the office of the O.P. to get the maturity value against said investment but the O.P. did not pay the maturity amount to the complainant since24.01.2020 to till to date. Under such circumstances, complainant filed this case before this Commission for passing necessary order directing the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs.52,240/- (Rs. 26,120/- + Rs.26,120/-) with interest on and from 25.01.2020 to till the date of realization and to pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation and Rs. 15,000/- as litigation cost.
Notice was issued upon the O.P. and the opposite party entered appearance and contested the case by filing a written version wherein the material averments made in the complaint are denied and it has been contended inter-alia that the instant case is not maintainable. It has been contended by the opposite party that due to some litigation pending with SEBI and the apex court regarding the financial transaction of O.P. group the payment has remained stopped and the opposite party craves leave of this Forum and prays for dismissal of the instant case.
In this case complainant has submitted examination-in-chief supported by affidavit together with written argument. He filed documents i.e. 2 (two) fixed deposit certificates dt. 24.01.2012.
O.P. has submitted examination-in-chief by way of affidavit and written argument along with order sheet passed by Supreme Court, being contempt petition (c) No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal 9813/2011, dated 21.11.2013.
`
Points for discussion
- Whether the complainant is a consumer within the meaning under Section 2 (I) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of O.P.?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief/reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point No.1
This issue is not disputed by the Ld. Advocate of the OP during his course of argument. This Commission has gone through the materials and evidence on record and after going through the entire facts and circumstances of the case with regard to the materials and evidence of the parties on record this Commission is of the view that the complainant is a consumer within the meaning under Section 2 (I) (d) of the consumer Protection Act 1986.
Point No. 2 and 3
These two issues are taken up together for discussion for the sake of brevity and convenience. This is admitted position that the complainant had purchased on 24.01.2012 two fixed deposit Sahara E-shine scheme certificates vide No. 351002798506 A/C No, 6038420034 and vide No.351002798507, A/c No. 6038420035 amounting to Rs. 10,000/- each from the opposite party with condition to get matured value of Rs. 26120/- each on 24.01.2020. This is also not disputed that the complainant has not yet received any single furthering from the opposite party against the aforesaid fixed deposit amount.
The materials and evidence submitted on the side of the complainant clearly shows that he is entitled to get the whole amount of Rs.52,240/- (Rs. 26,120/- + Rs.26,120/-) together with interest as per terms and conditions of the opposite party but the O.P. has failed and neglected to keep up his terms and conditions in due time and such nonpayment of the matured value of the deposited amount led the complainant to file the instant case before this Commission. So there is no hesitation to hold that there is enough deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The reason of inability of the opposite party in respect of payment and to observe the terms and conditions which has been stated by the opposite party in their written version and written argument cannot be accepted when it appears that the O.P. has violated the terms and conditions given in the certificate. Under such circumstances complainant is entitled to get matured value of Rs.52,240/- (Rs. 26,120/- + Rs.26,120/-) together with interest and compensation from the opposite party.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
That the Complaint Case No.80 of 2018 be and the same is allowed in part on contest with cost against the opposite party.
Opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.52,240/- as maturity value of the fixed deposit certificates along with interest @ 8% p.a. on and from 24.01.2020 to till the date of realization by issuing an account payee chaque in favour of the complainant within 45 days from the date of passing this order.
O.P. is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation cost by issuing an account payee chaque in the name of the complainant within 45 days from the date of passing this order, failing which the awarded amount will carry interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of this order till realization.
In case of default the complainant is at liberty to execute the order through this Commission as per law.
Let a plain copy of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith free of cost.
