DATE OF FILING                    :     05-08-2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      05-09-2014.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER       :     16-04-2015.  

1. Sk. Ruhul Amin,

   son  of  late  Sk. Nurul Haque,   

   residing at   Panchla Khal Par,  Panchla,

   District Howrah,

   PIN 711322,

   for self and the constituted attorney of the  

   complainant nos. 2 to 10.

2. Sk. Imran,

           son of  Sk. Sanowar Ali,    

           residing at Panchla Sepai, Panchla,  

           District Howrah,

           Pin 711322.

3. Sk. Sayed Ali,

           son  of late Sk. Jayed Ali,  

           residing at Panchla Moddhopara, Chara Panchla,  

          District  Howrah,

          PIN 711322.  

4. Sk. Jumman,

 son   of  Sk. Hossain Ali,    

          residing at  Panchla Khalpar,   Panchla, 

          District Howrah,

          PIN 711322.  

5. Tapas Kodali,

  son of Sri Dilip Kodali, ,   

           residing at  Kanduya Kodali Para, Kanduya, Sankrail,  

           District Howrah,

           PIN 711302.  

6. Sk. Abdul Halim,

          son of Sk. Hakim,

          residing at  Panchla Khalpar,  Panchla,

          District Howrah,

          PIN 711322.  

7. Sk. Abdul Salam,

          son of Sk. Badrur Dozza,    

          residing at Panchla Moddho Para, Panchla,  

          District Howrah,

          PIN 711322.

8. Jebunnesa Begum,

wife of  Sk. Azizur Rahman,     

          residing at  Panchla Khalpar,  Panchla,  

          District Howrah,

          PIN 711322.  

9. Amina Begum,

wife of Samin Mallick,    

           residing at  Panchla, District Howrah,

           PIN 711322.

10. Sk. Serajul Islam,

          son  of late Sk. Moktar Ali,     

          residing at village & P.O. Sahapur, P.S.  Panchla,   

          District Howrah,

          PIN 711322.  ……………………………………………… COMPLAINANTS.

• Versus -

   

  1.         VIVA Tourism Development Limited,

               popularly known as Viva Consultancy Services,

              having its corporate office at Nigam Centre, 4^th 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 Sarker.

                                         F   I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. 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.4,86,250/-, to pay an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- 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. 

2. 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 :

1. Sk. Ruhul Amin100 Days Scheme( Daily),

2. Sk. ImranRecurring Deposit Certificate no. 50456,

3. Sk. Sayed Ali100 Days Scheme( Daily) Certificate no. 73023,

4. Sk. JummanRecurring Deposit Certificate no. 53521,

                                     Fixed  Deposit Certificate no. 53520,  

5. Tapas KodaliRecurring Deposit Certificate no. 50454,

                                Fixed Deposit Certificate no. 27158, 

6. Sk. Abdul HalimRecurring Deposit Certificate no. 63605,

                                 100 Days Scheme ( Daily ) 70356,            

7. Sk. Abdul SalamFixedDeposit Certificate nos. 31449, 35738, 37079,38740,

8. Jebunnesa Begum100 Days Scheme ( Daily ) 73026,

9. Amina BegumRecurring Deposit Certificate no.64136,

10. Sk. Serajul IslamRecurring Deposit Certificate no. 71803.

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. 

5. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

2. 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. 432  of 2014 ( HDF 432  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.