BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANGALORE

Dated this the 30^th day of July 2016

PRESENT

        SMT. ASHA SHETTY           :  HON’BLE PRESIDENT     

        SMT.LAVANYA M. RAI        :   HON’BLE MEMBER                                        

ORDER IN

C.C.391/2015

(Admitted on 21.11.2015)

K V Karthyayini,

W/o Late Aiyappa,

 Aged about 75 years,

 Narayana Mangalam House,

Post Kumbla, Kasaragod Dist.

                                                        ……… Complainant

(Advocate for Complainant by Sri Gopala Krishna K.R)

VERSUS

1. Seven Hills Vividhodhesha

Souharda Co-operative Ltd,

Reg and Head Office, Ramesh Building,

        Adarsha Nagar, Opp:Jr.college Ground,

        Malur, Kolar Dist 563130.

        Represented by its President

        Managing Director G.Narayanappa.

2. Aggri Hills Forms Estate India Pvt. Ltd.

No.68, 1^st floor, Bagalur Road,

Krishnagiri Dist.

Hosur, Tamilanadu 635109.

Rep by G.Narayanappa,

President/Managing Director

                                                               ……. Opposite Parties

    3. Special officer.

       For Seven Hills Vividhodhesha

       Souhardha Co operative Ltd.

       Sri Y.Kumar,

       Deputy Chief Manager

       Karnataka State Souhardha Co Operative Ltd,

       Nrmana Bhavana, Dr.Rajkumar Road,

       1^st Blook, Rajajinagara, Bangalore 560010.      

(Opposite Party No.1, No.2 & No.3 Ex Parte)

ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT

SMT. ASHA SHETTY:

I.       1. The above complaint is filed Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties claiming certain reliefs.

The brief facts of the case are as under:

The Complainant submits at the instance of one agent of 1^st Opposite Party Smt. Puspalatha W/o Sudhakara R/o Kanipuresh House, Naikapu, Edyade, Post Kumble deposited the amount with Seven Hills Vividhodesha Souhardha Co-Operative Ltd for the plan as detailed in the table below, were issued in the name of complainant by the 1^st Opposite Party from its branch at Puttur.

Deposit Receipts will be as detailed in the table below.

The opposite parties are liable to refund the deposited amount.  The complainant along with agent visited the 1^st opposite party but the opposite party not refunded the amount till this date which amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the above complaint filed Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (herein after referred to as the act) seeking direction from this Forum to the opposite parties to pay the maturity value with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of maturity till payment along with ompensation and cost of the proceedings.

II.      1. Version notices served to the Opposite Parties.  Inspite of service of notices to Opposite Party No.1 and 2, not appeared nor represented the case till this date, hence we have proceeded exparte as against opposite parties.

III.     1. In support of the above complaints, all the respective Complainant has been examined as CW1 and produced

documents got marked under the Ex.C series detailed in the annexure here below.   Heard the arguments.

In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this case are as under:

1. Whether the Complainant proves that the Opposite Parties committed deficiency in service?
2. If so, whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed?
3. What order?

          We have considered the notes/oral arguments submitted by the learned counsel for the complainant and also considered the materials that was placed before this Forum and answer the points are as follows:

Point No. (i) and (ii): Affirmative

Point No. (iii) and (iv) As per the final order.

REASONS

IV.     1.  Point No.(i) to (iv) :   The Complainant in order to substantiate the averments made in her complaint filed affidavit supported by documents (detailed in annexure herein below).  The material documents produced by the complainant go to show that she has deposited sum of money with the Opposite Parties and Opposite Parties in turn undertaken to refund after the maturity i.e. Rs.22,400.

          However it could be seen on record that the 1 to 3 Opposite Parties inspite of receiving notice not appeared nor contested the case till this date and the entire evidence placed before this FORA is not contradicted nor controverted.  The unrebutted evidence requires no further proof.

It is pertinent to note that complainant has deposited certain sum of money with the Opposite Parties and the Opposite Parties failed to perform their obligation enumerated F.D receipt.

We are of the considered opinion that in a case of like this nature

reciprocal promises were enshrined in the contract/receipt executed between the parties and both the parties were obliged to perform in that order.  No doubt the complaint invested certain sum of money under the receipts / F.D for a particular period with the Opposite Parties and the Opposite Parties in turn received the invested amount from the complainant and agreed to refund within the stipulated time.  When that being so, it is the obligation on the part of the Opposite Parties to refund the amount to the complainant on the date mentioned in the Fixed Deposit Receipt.  But in the above case the Opposite Parties miserably failed to perform their promises / contracts entered between them.  Since the Opposite Parties failed to refund the amount till this date it amounts to unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service.

In view of the above discussion, we hold that, the Opposite Party No.1 to 3 jointly and severally shall refund the entire deposited amount i.e.22,400 along with interest 12% per annum from the date of maturity till the date of payment and further to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/ to the complainant as litigation expenses and payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

In the present cases, interest considered by this Forum itself is compensation and therefore, no separate amount for compensation is awarded.

In the result, we pass the following:-

ORDER

 Complaints allowed. Opposite Parties are jointly and severally shall refund Rs.22,400 i.e., maturity value along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of maturity till the date of payment and further to pay Rs.3,000/ as cost of  litigation expenses and payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

The F.D.R. if any deposited by the Complainant be returned fourth with by substituting the certified.

The copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties and therefore the file be consigned to record.

 (Page No.1 to 11 dictated to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 30^th July 2016.)

       PRESIDENT                                            MEMBER

 (SMT. ASHA SHETTY)                     (SMT. LAVANYA M.RAI)

D.K. District Consumer Forum                      D.K. District Consumer Forum

     Mangalore.                                                 Mangalore.       

ANNEXURE

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:

CW11:  K V Karthyayini

Documents produced on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex.C1: Date: 18.08.2012 Original deposit receipt.

Ex.C2:  Copy of the letter sent by the agent of the 1st opposite

             Party to the 1st opposite party.                                                                 

Ex.C3: Date: 18.09.2015 Copy of the legal notice sent by

            Advocate for complainant to the 1st Opposite Party.

Ex.C4: Postal acknowledgment for service legal notice.

Ex. C5: Copy of the sale deed executed in favour of 2nd opposite 

             Opposite Party.                     

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Parties:

 NIL

Documents produced on behalf of the Opposite Parties:

 NIL 

Dates: 30.07.2016                                        PRESIDENT