COMPLAINT FILED ON:23/08/2019

DISPOSED ON:28/04/2023

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHITRADURGA.

C.C.NO:503/2019

DATED: 28^th April 2023

PRESENT: Kum. H.N. MEENA, B.A., LL.B., PRESIDENT

                  Smt. B.H. YASHODA, B.A., LL.B., LADY MEMBER                       

                  Sri. H.JANARDHAN, B.A.L., LL.B., MEMBER

:JUDGEMENT:

Delivered by Hon’ble President, Kum. H.N. MEENA.

The complainant filed a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opponents. The complainant has prayed to direct the opponents to return of RD amount of Rs.1,10,000/- with accrued interest from the date of deposit till its realization. For issue an order to compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- towards inconvenience caused and towards mental shock, pain and agony and such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Commission deems fit to grant in the interest of Justice.

2. BRIEF FACTS OF CASE:

        The complainant submits in the complaint that the opposite parties have running a financial business in the name of Great fort Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited by locating office at 1^st floor, Dilavar Complex, Basaveshwara Talkies Road, Chitradurga. complainant is one of the customer of opposite parties, bank has contacted with an intention to open RD account for a period of one year, The opposite parties advised the complainant to open an RD account for a period of two years, and assured the complainant to approach the opposite party whenever he needed money and the opposite party would arrange the cash amount immediately. Accordingly, the complainant believed the opposite party and opened an RD account for a period of two years, in which certificate No.1494 bearing RD account No.4605 and the complainant has to pay regular monthly payment of Rs.10,000/- per month for a period of two years, the same is starting from 28/03/2018 to 28/03/2020, the complainant has to pay a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- and get benefited a sum of Rs.28,000/- i.e., he has got a sum of Rs.2,68,000/- on maturity, the maturity date is 28/3/2020.

          3. Further submits that, the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.10,000/-per month regularly from 28/3/2018 to 31/1/2019 in total he has paid a sum of Rs.1,10,000/-, there after some crises has arose in bank for that reason complainant has stopped payment of amount and requested the OP bank to refund or return of the amount that opposite parties have not return or paid the deposited amount till this day.  Complainant has approached the opposite parties and requested several times to repay the deposited amount but opposite party have to return the same, even though the opposite parties have given assurance at the time of opening of RD amount that whenever complainant has in need of money then the opposite parties have not paid the deposited amount till this day, this act of opposite parties clearly shows that they have utterly fail to perform their part of contract, this act of opposite parties have drag on the matter by one way or the other.  From the acts of opposite parties complainant has sustained heavy loss, and suffering from mental shock, pain and agony. That after learnt the malafide of opposite parties that they have colluded with each other has cheated this complainant and others, even after several request and demand the opposite parties they have not paid the deposit amount, having no any alternative except to approach the legal forum has issued the legal notice by way of RPAD on 10/07/2019 to the opposite parties through RPAD to the OPs even though they have not rectify their deficiency in service, and they have not came forward to returned of amount, this act of opposite party clearly shows their deficiency in service on their party towards the complainant and now they have closed the bank and they have not contact their customers and placed real facts, this act of opposite parties clearly shows their deficiency of service.

          4. The opposite parties have fails to perform their part of contract, they have played fraud and breach their part of contract, the opposite parties being a banking sector have make heavy loss to their customer/consumer, this acts of opposite parties clearly shows their malafide intention, from the acts of opposite parties the complainant has sustained heavy loss. Hence filed this complaint.

         5. After issuance of notice to OPs, OP No.1 and 2 appeared through their counsels, have filed versions and as follows.

 6. OP No.1 submits that, the averments in para 2 of the complaint, that the opposite parties have running a financial business in the name of Great fort Multipurpose Souharda Co-Operative Limited by locating office at 1^st floor, Dilavar Complex, Basaveshwara Talkies Road, Chitradurga is not disputed.

 7. The averments in para 3 of the complaint, that the complainant is one of the customer of opposite parties bank is not disputed.  Further the complainant with an intention to open RD account for a period of one year, the opposite parties have advice the complainant to open RD account for a period of two years as he has get benefitted, and given assurance that whenever complainant has in need of money he has to contact the opposite parties, immediately the opposite parties have make arrangement of cash amount, as per the advice, promise and assurance of opposite parties the complainant was being faith are all false for concocted created the facts to filing the false complaint against the OP No.1 and another.   The complainant is put to strict proof of the same.  Further averments in the same complaint, the complainant open an RD account for a period of two years having it RD account No.4605 bearing certificate No.1494 and the complainant has to pay regular monthly payment of Rs.10,000/- per month for a period of two years, the same is starting from 28/03/2018 to 28/03/2020, the complainant has to pay a sum of Rs.2,68,000/- on maturity, the maturity date is 28/03/2020 is not disputed.

8. The averments in para 4 of the complaint, that the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month not disputed but regularly from 28/03/2018 to 30/01/2019 in total he has paid a sum of Rs.1,10,000/-is not known at present.  Further averments in the same para, there after some crises has arose in bank for that reason he has stop payment of amount and requested to refund or return of the amount which has been deposited in opposite party bank, that opposite parties have not return or paid the deposited amount till this day are hereby denied.  It is respectfully submits that with respect to the above deposited amount, due to on account of some crises the Town Police, Chitradurga have seized all the books of accounts and properties of the OP No.1 and without looking the FD and receipts amount the OP No.1 cannot say the amount deposited by the complainant for a sum of Rs.1,10,000/-.

9. The averments in para 5,6, 7 and 8 are same is hereby denied.  The averments in para 9 of the complaint, the opposite parties have fails to perform their part of contract, they have played fraud and breach their part of contract, the opposite parties being a banking sector have make heavy loss to their customer/consumer, this acts of OP clearly shows their malafide intention, from the acts of OPs the complainant has sustained heavy loss are all false, concocted created the facts to file this false complaint. The complainant is put to strict proof of the same.

10. OP No.1 further submits that the OP No.1 is a Chief Executive Officer of the Great Fort Minorities Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited, Chitradurga Registered as per the Karnataka Souharda Co-operative Act, 1997. The OP No.1 running a business under the above name and style at Chitradurga. It is submits that one of the Pigney collector by name Raju with the OP No.1 suddenly stopped the Pigney and RD collection and he has mis-statements and defamed against the OP No.1 in public and the said mis-statements was viral in public. Hence one Habeebulla Rehaman Khan S/o Abdul Annan Khan has lodged a complaint before the Town Police Station, Chitradurga on 27/06/2019 the said police registered the case against the OP No.1 in Crime No.127/2019 for the offence punishable U/s 409 and 420 of IPC. The Said Police during the investigation seized all the documents relating to the OP No.1 Hence the OP No.1 is unable to attend the duties of the OP No.1 office. Hence till the disposal of the criminal case and investigation is going on, hence OP No.1 is unable to pay or refund any amount deposited by the complainant before the OP No.1.

11. It is submitted that as per the RD deposited by the complainant before the OP No.1 for a period of 2 years. As per the terms and conditions RD deposit amount the complainant shall not refund or return the RD deposit amount pre-matured. Hence the complaint filed by the complainant against the OP No.1 is not maintainable in law. The complainant deposited the said amount before the OP No.1 Co-operative institution not individual. Hence OP No.1 is not liable to pay any compensation individual. If any order passed by this Hon’ble Court the complainant is only entitle against the great fort Minorities Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative institution. Any complaint lodged by the complainant against the OPs after the 28/03/2020. Hence, Hon’ble commission be pleased to order to dismiss the complaint against the OP No.1 in the interest of justice.

12. OP No.2 submits in the version that, the allegations made in the complaint, which are specifically admitted as not correct, para No. 4 to 10 are utterly false, baseless, far away from the truth. That the allegations made in the para No.2 of the petition, saying OPs have running a financial business in the name of the Great Fort Multipurpose Souhardha Co-operative Limited, office at Dilavar Complex, Basaveshwara Talkies Road, Chitradurga is correct. And complainant is one of the customer of OPs bank is correct. Further it is false to say the OPs have advice the complainant to open RD account for a period of 2 years as he has get benefited are all false, baseless and far away from the truth. Further allegations in the same para are utterly false, baseless and far away from the truth. OP-2 further submits that as hereunder;

1. OP-2 is working in the Great Fort Minority Multi-Purpose Souhardha Co-Operative Bank as employee since more than 20 years. And the bank authorities never given the appointment order to the O.P.No.2 here so far.

2. That the opposite party is working as a employee and the opposite party is discharge his duty in the above said bank as per the directions of the Managing Committee of Great Fort Minority Multi-Purpose Souhardha Co-Operative Bank.

3. OP-1-Syed Shakil Ahammed Hussaini-Managing Director of Great Fort Minority Multi-Purpose Souhardha Co-Operative Bank has purchased the properties in favour of the said bank for the purpose of customers, and to allot the sites to the customers.

4. It is submitted in the month of March 2019, the said issue has arisen, and the OP No.l-Managing Director Great Fort Minority Multi-Purpose Souhardha Co-Operative Bank has assured to repay the amount which is kept in the bank by the customers.

5. OP-2 made a petition before the Extension Police Chitradurga for protection, since the customers are daily came to his house, scolding the OP No.2 in a filthy language in front of his house and demanded to give back the money like that etc., daily there is \ harassment from the customers. Hence the petition is liable for dismissal.

13. The complainant No.1 got herself examined as PW-1 and the documents were got marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-5(a) and the opponent have examined as DW-1 and DW-2 but the documents were not marked, closed the evidence on both side. Complainant and opponent No.1 have filed their written Arguments.

Though opportunity was granted to both the parties to submit their arguments but both parties have not opted to submit their arguments and hence argument of both the parties was taken as heard.

          14. Now, the points that arise for our consideration for

             decision of above complaint are that:

1. Whether the complainant proves that the opponents are negligent and there is deficiency in service?

2. Whether the complainant is entitle for reliefs as sought in the complaint?

3. What order?

15. Our finding on the above points are as follows:

Point No.1 and 2:  Partly Affirmative.

Point No.3: As per final order.

REASONS

         16. Point No.1 & 2: We have gone through the pleading of complaint and documents i.e., Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-5 are clearly show that, the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month regarding from 28/03/2018 to 31/01/2019 in total he has paid a sum of Rs.1,10,000/-.  The opposite parties have advice the complainant to open RD account for a period of two years as he has get benefitted, and given assurance that whenever complainant has in need of money he has to contact the opposite parties, immediately the opposite parties have make arrangement of cash amount, as per the promise of opposite parties have failed to return or settle the amount of the complainant. The complainant has paid the said amount for her legal necessity and her family benefit because of non-returning the RD amount the complainant.

          17. In this regard, the OP No.1 has taken the contention that, the OP No.1 is a Chief Executive officer of the Great Fort Minorities Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Limited, Chitradurga Registered as per the Karnataka Souharda Co-operative Act, 1997. The OP No.1 running a business under the above name and style at Chitradurga. It is submits that one of the Pigney collector by name Raju with the OP No.1 suddenly stopped the Pigney and RD collection and he has mis-statements and defamed against the OP No.1 in public and the said mis-statements was viral in public. Hence one Habeebulla Rehaman Khan S/o Abdul Annan Khan has lodged a complaint before the Town Police Station, Chitradurga on 27/06/2019 the said police registered the case against the OP No.1 in Crime No.127/2019 for the offence punishable U/s 409 and 420 of IPC. The Said Police during the investigation seized all the documents relating to the OP No.1 Hence the OP No.1 is unable to attend the duties of the OP No.1 office. Hence till the disposal of the criminal case and investigation is going on, hence OP No.1 is unable to pay or refund any amount deposited by the complainant.

          18. In the above circumstances we perused the Ex.A-1 is clearly shows that, the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month regularly from 28/03/2018 to 31/01/2019 in total he has paid an amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- it is not disputed. The opponent No.1 has not given any reason. In any angle shows that the OPs have committed deficiency of service. The OP No.2 has taken the contention that, the OP No.2 is working in the Great Fort Minorities Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Bank as employee since more than 20 years. And the Bank authority never given the appointment order to the OP No.2. further stated that, the OP is working as an employee and the opposite party  is discharge his duty in the above said bank as per the direction of the Managing Committee of Great Fort Minorities Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Bank, the Managing committee is liable to pay the amount of customers which are kept in the said bank. OP No.2 is innocent and he never misappropriated the amount in the bank at any time.  At the time of the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month regularly from 28/03/2018 to 31/03/2019. The OP No.2 is working as an employee of the Managing Committee of Great Fort Minorities Multipurpose Souharda Co-operative Bank. Hence, the complainant has made a party in this complaint. The OP No.2 has not provide any evidentiary documents that, I am not working in the bank, at the time of complaint these are the above reasons, we come to the conclusion that, the OPs have committed deficiency of service. The complainant has entitled the RD amount with interest at the rate of 6 % p.a. from the date of complaint till its realization. Hence the Point No.1 and 2 is partly affirmative.

19. Point No.3:  As discussed on the above Points and for the reasons stated we pass the following.

::ORDER::

1. The complaint filed by the complainant U/s.12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is Partly allowed.

2. The OPs No.1 and 2 are Jointly and severally liable to pay of Rs.1,10,000/- under receipt No.1494 in R.D. and along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of complaint.

3. Further the OPs No.1 and 2 are hereby to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-  towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation charges.

4. Further the OPs No.1 and 2 shall have comply the above said order within 30 days from the date of this order.

5. Send the free copies to both parties.

 (Typed directly on the computer to the dictation given to stenographer, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced by us on 28^th April 2023.)

           Sd/-                                          Sd/-                         Sd/-​

  LADY MEMBER                  MEMBER               PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witness examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:- Sri Habeeulla S/o Late Dastagir Sab,  by way of affidavit of

            evidence.

Witness examined on behalf of opponents:

DW-1:-  Sri Shakil Ahamed Husaini  S/o Swaleha,,   by way of  

            affidavit of evidence.

DW-2:- Sri Mohammed Ismayil Zabiulla, by way of affidavit of

            evidence.

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

Documents marked on behalf of opponents:

Nil

           Sd/-                                          Sd/-                         Sd/-

  LADY MEMBER                  MEMBER               PRESIDENT

*GM