Complaint Case No. CC/14/430 |
| | 1. MONIRA BEGUM | Wife of Sk. Ruhul Amin, Panchla Khalpar, Panchla, Dist Howrah | 2. Hazera Begum | Wife of lt. Sk. Nurul Haque, Panchla Khalpar, Panchla, Dist Howrah | 3. Asiya Begum | Wife of Sk. Kutub Uddin, Panchla Khalpar, Panchla, Dist Howrah 711 322 | 4. Bipin Sana | Son of lt. Sufol Sana, Panchla Sk. Para, Panchla, Dist Howrah-711322 | 5. Md. Soleman Tarafdar | Son of Saha Buddin Tarafdar, Panchla Sepai Para, Panchla, Dist Howrah-711322 | 6. Hemanta Maji | Son of Nelu Maji, Panchla Mitrapara (Dompara), Panchla, Dist Howrah-711322 | 7. Majeda Begum | Wife of Sk. Hafij, Panchla Khalpar, Dist Howrah-711322 | 8. Nazrul Tarafdar | Son of lt. Monowar Tarafdar, Panchla Sepai Para, Panchla, Dist Howrah-711322 | 9. Sk. Mortoja Hassan | Son of lt. Sk. Jan Ali, Panchla Sk. Para, Panchla, Dist Howrah-711322 | 10. Sk. Nazrul Islam | Son of Sk. Shajahan, Panchla Sepai Para, Panchla, Dist Howrah-711322 |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
Versus | 1. VIVA TOURSIM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED | Viva Consultancy Services, Nigam Centre 4th Floor, Room No 409 155 Lenin Sarani, Kolkata 700 013 | 2. Branch Office, VIVA TOURSIM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED | Biki Hakola, Ranihati P.O. Jaynagar P.S. Panchla, Howrah 711 322 | 3. Chairman Viz Sk. Samim Aktar,VIVA TOURSIM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED | S/O SK. Siddik Ali, Village Coatbar, P.O. Uttar Coatbar P.S. Bhaganpur Purbamedinipur | 4. Vice Chairman, Satten Barman, VIVA TOURSIM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED | Village Kajlaghar, P.O. Bajkul, P.S. Bhagobanpur, Purba Medinipur | 5. Managing Director, Viz Sk. Jamir Iqbal, VIVA TOURSIM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED | S/O Sk. Jaidul Islam, Vill + P.O. Sabalsigha, P.S. Khanakul Hooghly 712717 | 6. Regional Manager Viz Sk. Kasem Ali, VIVA TOURSIM DEVELOPMENT LIMITED | S/O SK. Nurhossain,Barogabbaria (Banstola) P.O. Gabberia, P.S. Panchla Howrah 711 322 |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
ORDER | DATE OF FILING : 05-08-2014. DATE OF S/R : 05-09-2014. DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 16-04-2015. Monira Begum, wife of Sk. Ruhu Amin, residing at Panchla Khalpar, Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322, for self and the constituted attorney of the complainant nos. 2 to 10.
- Hazera Begum,
wife of late Sk. Nurul Haque, residing at Panchla Khalpar, Panchla, District Howrah, Pin 711322. - Asiya Begum,
wife of Sk. Kutub Uddin, residing at Panchla Khalpar, Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322. - Bipin Sana,
son of late Sufol Sana, residing at Panchla Sk. Para, Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322. - Md. Soleman Tarafdar,
son of Saha Buddin Tarafdar, residing at Panchla Sepai Para, Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322. - Hemanta Maji,
son of Nelu Maji, residing at Panchla Mitrapara ( Dompara ), Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322. - Majeda Begum,
wife of Sk. Hafij, residing at Panchla Mitrapara ( Dompara ), Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322. - Nazrul Tarafdar,
son of late Monowar Tarafdar, residing at Panchla Sepaipara, Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322. - Sekh Mortoja Hassan,
son of late Sk. Jan Ali, residing at Panchla Sk. Para, Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322. - Sk. Nazrul Islam,
son of late Sk. Shajahan, residing at , Panchla Sepaipara, District Howrah, PIN 711322. ……………………………………………… COMPLAINANTS. Versus - 1. VIVA Tourism Development Limited, popularly known as Viva Consultancy Services, having its corporate office at Nigam Centre, 4th floor, room no. 409, 155 Lenin Sarani, Kolkata 700013. 2. Branch Office at Biki Hakola, Ranihati, P.S., Panchla, Howrah. Howrah 711322. 3. The Chairman viz. Sk. Samim Akter, son of Sk. Siddik Ali, Village Uttar Kotbar, P.O. Bhagabanpur, P.S. Bazkul, District Purba Medinipur, PIN 721626. 4. The Vice Chairman. Satyen Barmen, residing at village Kachlagar, P.O. Bhagabanpur, P.S. Bazkul, District Purba Medinipur, PIN 721626. 5. The Managing Director viz. Sk. Jamir Iqbal, son of Sk. Jaidul Islam of village & P.O. Sabalsinghapur, P.S. Khanakul, Dstrict Hooghly, PIN 712717. 6. Regional Manager, viz. Sk. Kasem Ali, residing at Gabbaria Sk Para, P.O. Gabberia, P.S. Panchla, District Howrah, PIN 711322.. …………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES. P R E S E N T Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha. Member : Shri Subrata Sarke F I N A L O R D E R
- Complainants ten in numbers by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) have prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to pay them the entire amounts of the schemes, namely Fixed Deposit, 100 days Scheme ( Daily ), Recurring deposits being Rs.3,88,050/-, to pay an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- in total as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment and litigation costs of Rs.10,000/- along with other orders as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
- Brief fact of the case is that complainants made investments in Fixed Deposit, 100 days Scheme ( Daily ), Recurring deposits scheme issued by the o.ps., on different dates vide Annexures collectively. Their certificate nos. are as follows :
Monira Begum100 days Scheme ( Daily ) Certificate Nos. 73521, 72462, Fixed Deposit Certificate No. 48851.
- Hazera BegumFixed Deposit Certificate No. 75478,
100 days Scheme ( Daily ) Certificate No. 73025, - AsiyaBegumFixed Deposit Certificate No. 35082,
- Bipin SanaFixed Deposit Certificate No. 31802,
- Md. Soleman TarafdarRecurring Deposit Certificate No. 31410,
- Hemanta MajiFixed Deposit Certificate No. 26801,
- Majeda BegumRecurring Deposit CertificateNo. 34399,
- Nazrul Tarafdar100 Days Scheme 73024,
- Sekh Mortoja HassanFixed Deposit Certificate No. 30894, 34395,
- Sk. Nazrul Islam RecurringDeposit Certificate Nos. 48855, 62199.
3. O.Ps. promised to pay the maturity amount of investment made by the complainants on different dates in different schemes. But it is alleged by the complainants that o.ps. have not paid the maturity amount to the complainants even after the expiry of the due dates without any valid reason. Complainants repeatedly went to the office of o.ps. but on different pleas they have returned the complainants without giving their maturity amount. It is further stated by the complainants that with the maturity amounts of the investments, they are to run their livelihood, meet medical expenditure, children’s education etc. which are really at stake. So, finding no other alternative, complainants filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief. 4. Notices were served. The o.p. nos. 5 & 6 appeared and filed written version and the rest of the o.ps. remained absent without filing any written version. Accordingly, case was heard on contest against o.p. nos. 5 & 6 and ex parte against the rest. - Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ? - Whether the complainants are entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS : Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written version filed by o.p. nos. 5 & 6 and noted its contents. It is a fact that complainants invested in the o.ps. company and o.ps. have failed to pay the maturity amount to the complainants for which complainants felt tremendous monetary problem. Because, people invest their hard earned money in a reputed company to get the ultimate benefit at their need. O.ps. have miserably failed to keep promise which they made on the face of the certificates issued by them in favour of complainants. For their gross negligence in discharging duties, complainants had to suffer a lot for the crying need of money. Sacrificing many present enjoyments involving monetary expenditure, complainant made those investments foreseeing their future needs. If that criteria is not fulfilled due to o.ps.’ severe negligence, complainant is, thereby, truly prejudiced which can be very well understood by a man of common prudence. Moreover, some of the o.ps. have not even care to appear before the Forum even after receiving summons. No W/V has been filed by them which clearly shows that they have nothing to put forward in their favour. And the complaint petition remains unchallenged and uncontroverted against them. But we are to keep in mind that at the time of receiving the fund from the complainants they were very much attached with the company. So they cannot shrug off their liability and responsibility towards the complainants. O.ps. have miserably failed to keep promise which certainly amounts to deficiency in service coupled with unfair trade practice on their part which should not be allowed to be perpetuated for an indefinite period. And we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant should be allowed. Points under consideration are accordingly decided. Hence, O R D E R E D That the C. C. Case No. 430 of 2014 ( HDF 430 of 2014 ) be allowed on contest with costs against the O.P. nos. 5 & 6 and ex parte with costs against the rest. That the O.Ps. are directed jointly and severally to pay the maturity amount as well as principal amounts of all investments made by the complainants of this instant petition with respect to Fixed Deposit, 100 days Scheme ( Daily ), Recurring deposits in question within one month from this order i.d., 9% p.a. interest shall be charged till actual payment. The complainants do get an award Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 3,000/- as litigation cost and o.ps. are directed to pay the same within one month from this order i.d. amount shall carry an interest @ 9% p.a. till actual payment. The complainants are at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period. Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule. DICTATED & CORRECTED BY ME. ( Jhumki Saha ) Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah. | |