UNION OF INDIA Vs. KUMARI RENU AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners/OP against the order dated 04.06.2012 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 308/2012 Superintendent of Police Vs. Kumari Renu Agrawal by which, while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.

(2.) Brief facts of the complainant are that OP No. 1 is agent of OP No. 2 & 3 and runs business on commission basis. Complainant had been depositing Rs.620/- per month as Recurring Deposit (RD) with OP No. 1 through OP No. 1's husband Kamal Kishore Aggarwal-OP No. 4. OP No. 1 used to keep passbook after entry from OP No. 2. Initially, RD was for a period of 5 years, which was extended for another 5 years. After completion of second term, complainant contacted OP No. 2 for release of payment, but OP No. 2 asked complainant/Respondent to bring passbook. Complainant contacted OP No. 1, where OP No. 4 was also present and they demanded illegal amount for giving passbook and also insulted complainant and thus, they have committed unfair trade practice. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint. OP No. 1 admitted depositing amount in RD by complainant through her, but submitted that passbook was returned to complainant's father after entry. Further, denied allegations of demand of money and insulting. OP No. 4 submitted that maturity amount of first RD was obtained by father of the complainant in 1999 at his own level and further denied allegations levelled by the complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint. OP No. 2 submitted that complainant was directed to submit application along with passbook to obtain duplicate passbook for release of payment and denied any deficiency and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing all the parties directed OP NO. 2-Petitioner to issue duplicate passbook if complainant submits application and documents for issuance of duplicate passbook and further directed to release payment with interest @ 8% p.a. OP No. 1 & 4 were directed to pay Rs.2,000/- for mental agony and complaint was dismissed against OP No. 3. Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order against which, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and perused record. Respondents have already been proceeded ex-parte.