Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/13/87

ASHOK KAPOOR - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNIT TRUST OF INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

SH. R. TIWARI

25 Jul 2022

ORDER

M. P. STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,                         

                             PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

 

                                      FIRST APPEAL NO. 87 OF 2013

(Arising out of order dated 13.12.2012 passed in C.C.No.901/2008 by District Commission, Bhopal)

 

ASHOK KAPOOR,

S/O LATE SHRI BIHARILAL KAPOOR,

R/O CI HOMES, C-BLOCK, 103,

MATA MANDIR, BHOPAL (M.P.)                                                                …  APPELLANT.

 

Versus

 

1. UNIT TRUST OF INDIA,

    GANGA-JAMUNA APARTMENT,

    BEHIND JYOTI TALKIES,

    ZONE-I, M.P.NAGAR, BHOPAL

 

2. UNIT TRUST OF INDIA,

    THROUGH DEPARTMENT OF

    INVESTMENT SERVICE, UTI TOWER,

    JM BLOCK, BANDRA-KURLA COMPLEX,

    BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI.                                                                       …. RESPONDENT.   

                      

BEFORE :

            HON’BLE SHRI A. K. TIWARI                : PRESIDING MEMBER

            HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY        :          MEMBER

            HON’BLE SHRI D. K. SHRIVASTAVA   :          MEMBER

         

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

                Shri Ravindra Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant.

           Shri Uday Palnitkar, learned counsel for the respondents.

 

 O R D E R

(Passed On 25.07.2022)

                                The following order of the Commission was delivered by A. K. Tiwari, Presiding Member: 

           

                   This appeal by the complainant/appellant is directed against the order dated 13.12.2012 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal

-2-

Commission, Bhopal (for short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.901/2008 whereby the complaint filed by the complainant/appellant has been dismissed.

2.                The case of the complainant is such that he had deposited a sum of Rs.24,500/- on 03.05.2000 under the scheme “Get treated at the Country Best Hospitals’, We All Pay the Bill-Scup” under which the beneficiary is entitled to get treatment incurring expenses of Rs.5 lac in any hospital. On 01.08.2008, the opposite party no.2 informed that earlier an intimation was sent regarding termination of said scheme w.e.f. 18.02.2008 whereas he did not receive any such intimation. It is alleged that in the said letter nothing has been mentioned that why in what circumstances, the scheme was terminated. The complainant therefore filed complaint seeking direction to declare the termination of the said scheme as null and void and to direct the opposite party to continue the said scheme. Further compensation of Rs.50,000/- along with Rs.10,000/- towards costs and advocate fees has also been claimed.

3.                The opposite party resisted the complaint stating that the Senior Citizens Unit Plan and Senior Citizens Unit Scheme (SCUP) was launched in 1993 as socially oriented scheme catering to the needs of meeting the hospitalization costs up to Rs.2.5 lac/5 lacs after attaining 58/61 years of age as mentioned in SCUP.  The said scheme was terminated by the opposite party since it has faced financial crisis after approval of the Government of India and consequent on the termination of the scheme whatever the investors are entitled the same will be extended to them and therefore there is no deficiency on part of the opposite party. 

-3-

4.                After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on appreciation of evidence on record, the District Commission dismissed the complaint. .

5.                Heard learned counsel for the appellants. Perused the record.

6.                After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the record, we find that in exercise to the powers conferred by Section 19(1) (8) (c) of the Unit Trust of India Act, 1963, the Board of Trustees of the Unit Trust of India makes the plan under the name and style “Senior Citizens Unit Plan” (SCUP) came into force on 3^rd May 1993 and published in Gazette of India on 28.08.1993 (Annexure-A). Clause XXX of the said scheme provides for termination of the scheme at the discretion of the Trust.  Clause XXX of the said scheme reads as follows:

                   XXX Termination of the Scheme

“The scheme shall stand finally terminated at the discretion of the Trust. In the event of termination of the Scheme no new entrants shall be allowed to join the scheme after the specified date of termination.  The outstanding units of the member whose names entered in the Register on the date to be specified shall be repurchased at such a rate as may be decided by the Trust. The members shall be paid the amount due as early as possible, after the membership certificate/s with the form on the reverse thereof duly completed has been received by it.  The Membership Certificate received for repurchase shall be retained by the trust for cancellation.  When the Trust decides to terminate the Scheme it will be binding on the members and they shall have no right to persuade the Trust to continue the Scheme.”

 

7.                From the above examination, it is clear that there was a provision in the original scheme for closure of the scheme SCUP and the scheme has been closed w.e.f.18.02.2008.  The permission of Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (Annexure-C) and Assistant General

-4-

Manager, Investment Management Department, Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) (Annexure-D) was also obtained for closure of the scheme. General Public Notice regarding termination/closure of the scheme was also published in daily newspaper ‘Dainik Jagran’, Bhopal dated 26.01.2008. Thus we find that the scheme SCUP has been closed under the provisions given in the original notification published in Gazette dated 28.08.1993 (Annexure-A) regarding which relevant approvals and permission were also obtained.

8.                In the similar facts and circumstances in a case related to the same SCUP scheme, the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore in Appeal No.1572/2008 (The General Manager, Unit Trust of India Vs Amitabh Goel and in Appeal No.1671/2008 (Amitabh Goel Vs The General Manager, Unit Trust of India), vide order dated 01.12.2008 holding that “If the Board of Trustees due to any financial crisis and in the interest of the investors terminated the scheme, then it cannot be said that there is deficiency in service since it is done in exercise of its power under the Clause XXX of the scheme framed and floated by virtue of the power conferred under Section 21 of the UTI Act,” allowed the appeal filed by the opposite party Unit Trust of India and dismissed the appeal filed by the complainant setting aside the order passed by the District Commission awarding compensation of Rs.10,000/-. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition No. 2588 OF 2011 (Sanjay Podaar Vs UTI Mutual Fund and Another) decided on 13.05.2016 holding that “It is clear that there was a provision in the

 

-5-

original scheme for closure of the scheme SCUP and the scheme has been closed as per the provision of the scheme.”

9.                In the above circumstances, we find that the opposite party/respondent has not committed any deficiency in service for closure of the scheme SCUP as per provision in the original scheme. So far as the prayer of the complainant/appellant to declare the termination/closure of the scheme as null and void/ultra-wires is concerned, we are in a considered view that this power does not rest with this Commission and we are unable to accept his prayer.

10.               In view of the above discussion, we find that there is no illegality or perversity in the order passed by the District Commission which calls for any interference by this Commission. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. However, the respondent Unit Trust of India is directed to extend all the benefits, which the appellant is entitled consequent on the termination of the SCUP scheme.

           

       (A. K. Tiwari)      (Dr. Srikant Pandey) (D. K. Shrivastava)

 Presiding Member            Member                     Member