UTI to pay Rs 72K for encashing scheme in favour of imposter

NEW DELHI, May 13: The Unit Trust of India (UTI) has been directed by a consumer forum here to pay Rs 72,000 to a woman who was issued a children’s growth fund certificate, the proceeds of which went to an imposter.
Swati Goel, who held the UTI Children’s Gift Growth Fund Scheme (CGGF) certificate, had approached the Central District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum alleging she was not paid the money due to her under the scheme after it was closed by the UTI.
The forum presided by B B Chaudhary observed that the certificate holder was deprived of the proceeds of the CGGF scheme as the UTI had paid the proceeds to a person, who was not authorised by her to receive that amount.
“There is nothing on record to suggest that complainant (Goel) had authorised Nitesh Choudhary (imposter) to represent her to encash the proceeds of CGGF scheme. The UTI encashed the proceeds to a person, who was not authorised by her.
“Consequently, she cannot be held responsible for the act of the imposter. She has been deprived of the proceeds of her CGGF scheme. She has suffered financial losses as well as harassment, pain and mental agony, that too without any fault on her part,” the forum said.
The UTI in its reply had admitted that the outstanding units of the CGGF scheme were encashed by someone else, but contended that imposter should also be made a party in the case.
The forum rejected the contention and directed the PSU to pay Goel Rs 47,813 as proceeds of the CGGF scheme certificate along with Rs 20,000 as compensation for harassment and Rs 5,000 as litigation charges.
Goel in her plea had also contended that after the CGGF scheme was foreclosed, her certificate was converted to US-95 scheme and she was entitled to Rs 75,000 after maturity of the US-95 scheme.
The UTI had denied Goel’s claim, saying when the CGGF scheme was closed, only option given to certificate holders was to convert their units to 6.6 per cent Tax-Free Assured Return Scheme Bond, but she had not opted for it.
It said that the CGGF scheme could not be converted to the US-95 scheme. The forum agreed with this contention of the PSU. (PTI)