UNIT TRUST OF INDIA Vs. BANDANA ROY CHOWDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition No. 612ofl995has been filed by the Unit Trust of India against the Order of the West Bengal State Commission dated 4.8.95. The admitted facts in this case are that Smt. Bandana Roy Chowdhury and Kum. Anita Roy Chowdhury applied for 3,000 units of Master Gain, 1992 on 12.5.92 and paid for the same through a cheque drawn on the ANZ Grindlays Bank, Calcutta. The cheque was encashed by the Unit Trust of India on 30.5.92, but the units were not sent to Smt. Bandana Roy Chowdhury and Kum. Anita Roy Chowdhury, who are the respondent before us, till December, 1993. The respondents then filed a complaint before the District Forum, Calcutta, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Unit Trust of India for not delivering the units applied and paid for even after a period of 18 months and thus resulting in mental agony and harassment etc. The District Forum, Calcutta, decided the case on 3.10.94 directing the respondents to deliver 3,000 Master Gain, 1992 shares straightaway to the respondents with all the benefits retrospectively, within one month from the date of the Order. This District Forum, however, rejected the claim for compensation of a sum of Rs. 2 laksh by the respondents. They filed an appeal before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal in November, 1994 which passed an order on 4.8.95 directing the U.T.I, to pay interest at the rate of 15% p.a. on the amount of Rs. 30,000/- effective from June, 1992 and until the said 3,000 units of Master Gain shares, 1992 are issued and delivered to the respondents. In addition to interest, the State Commission also awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the respondents as compensation for suffering, harassment, mental agony and torture caused by the appellants by delaying the delivery of the units.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the U.T.I, inspite of having encashed the cheque of the respondents for a sum of Rs. 30,000/- on 30.5.92 did not deliver the units applied for till December, 1993 when the respondents filed a complaint before the District Forum, Calcutta. The units were not delivered to the respondents even after the decision of the State Commission, West Bengal, on 4.8.95 as would be evident from the letter dated November 2,1995 addressed by the Unit Trust of India to the respondents enclosing the duplicate application form with the request to fill it in for the allotment of these units. This letter was sent by the U.T.I., after the filing of the appeal before us. The explanation of the Unit Trust of India is that the application made by the respondents could not be traced, and, therefore, the units could not be sent to them in time. We, however, find from the record that the respondents have made repeated requests, through their letters to Datamatics Financial Services Ltd., the authorised agents of the U.T.I., for the issue of these units and have written to the Unit Trust Authorities also from time to time. They also sent duplicate forms, duly filled in, whenever required, either by the Datamatics Financial Services Ltd., or by the Unit Trust of India. The delay in this case, therefore, is apparent and established and there is no doubt that such a delay constitutes a deficiency in service.

(3.) THE U.T.I, is directed to take urgent steps to deliver these units to the respondents, if not already delivered, and in any case, not later than 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order. The interest on Rs. 30,000/- @ 15% p.a. from June, 1992 and upto the date of delivery of the unit certificates should also be paid simultaneously. In addition, the appellants shall pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- by way of costs to the respondents.