PUNJAB UNIVERSITY Vs. UNIT TRUST OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS complaint is filed by the Punjab University contending that there are about 4000 employees and Provident Fund and other benefits are granted to them as per the Rules. The said amount was required to be invested at a safe place. For this, Unit Trust of India (UTI for short) made an offer in the year 1993 under the Institutional Investors" Special Fund Unit Scheme 1993 (IISFUS 1993 for short) in which scheme out of the funds of the Provident Fund of those employees, the complainant invested Rs.9.6 crores because there was protection of original capital by guarantee and there was assured return of 16% p.a. payable half-yearly.

(2.) THAT amount was invested with the reinvestment option of the dividend and the said amount became Rs.19.78 crores on termination of the scheme by the UTI on 31.3.1998. Thereafter, in the year 1998, another Scheme, i.e. IISFUS-98 was pronounced by the UTI and at the suggestion of the Chairman, UTI, the Complainant invested the said amount of Rs.19 Crores, which was received by it on the maturity of IISFUS 1993 Scheme with a specific understanding that dividend which was receivable during the Scheme period would be reinvested and it would be refunded with a minimum interest @ 13.5% per annum.

(3.) AS against this, the UTI has paid only Rs.19 Crores for 1.90 Crores of units (original capital) plus Rs.11.45 Crores, on the basis of Net Asset Value (NAV) at the rate of 3.84 per Unit for 2.97 Crores of units purchased from that dividend/return. In all, it has paid Rs.30.45 Crores. At the time of hearing, Mr.Saran, learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) raised a preliminary contention at the belated stage (we use the term "belated stage" because the matter was previously heard twice and no such contention was raised) that the complaint was not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, (C.P. Act for brief) as investing amount with the UTI was a "commercial activity".