Before the District Forum: Kurnool

Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President

And

Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member

Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., Member

Thursday the 6^th day of November, 2003

C.D.No.89/2003

S.Venu Gopal Rao,

S/o Sunka Rangaiah,

Balaji Complex,

Nandyal,

Kurnool District.                            . . . Complainant represented by his Counsel

                                                             Sri D.M.Ramachandra Reddy

-Vs-

1. Kethepalli Venkateswarlu,

     S/o. Ramalakshmaiah,

     Annapurna Investments and Financiers,

Represented by its Managing partner,       

19/35-D, Medam Street,

     Nandyal.

1. Perumalla Venkateswarlu,

     S/o. Venkaiah, C/30,

     Balaji Complex,

Nandyal.

1. Sarana Satyanarayana,

     S/o. Gopal Krishna,

     25/511, Vijaya Complex,

     Nandyal.

1. Gangisetty Ramanjanamma,

     W/o. Annaiah, C-52,

    Balaji Complex,

    Nandyal.

1. Yelukuru Prameelamma,

    W/o. Phaniraj, 25/517-A2,

    Sreenivasa Nagar, Nandyal.

1. Venkadara Prem Kumar,

     S/o. Krishnamurthy,

    2/428 B18, Balaji Complex,

     Nandyal.

1. Sarana  Radha Krishan,

     S/o. Gopalaiah, 17-40 B,

     Park Road, Nandyal.

1. Thunuguntla Vijaya Lakshmi,

      W/o. Soma Sekhar Rao,

2/428, 30-B13, Balaji Complex,

    Nandyal.

1. Chatakonda Supraja,

    D/o. Subrahmanyam,

    25/282 B, Sanjieevanagar,

    Nandyal.

1. Venkadara Pullamma,

      W/o. Ratnamaiah,

      3/158, Byrmal Street,

      Nandyal.                          . . . Opposite parties 1 to 10 (In persons)

O R D E R

1.       This Consumer Dispute case of the complainant is filed under Sec.12 of the C.P.Act seeking a direction on the opposite party for the payment of RS.9,351/- with 18% interest per annum from the date of the maturity, RS,1200/- towards costs with 18% future interest and such other reliefs which the exigencies of the case demand.

1. The brief facts of the complainant’s case are that in pursuance of the advertisement of the opposite parties Registered Firm inviting Fixed Deposits from the public promising attractive return of double the sum deposited within 5 ½ years, the complainant deposited with the opposite parties Registered Firm a sum of RS 2,550/- on dt 9.2.94 for a promised maturity value of RS. 6,000/-by

dt  10.3.01 and obtained fixed deposit bond No. ­­­­­63 with the Membership No.875.  But the opposite party did not pay the matured amount on the maturity inspite of several demands and notice

dt 25.2.2003  and ultimately refusing to pay on personal approach also and the said conduct of the opposite parties as amounting to deficiency of service of supine degree on the part of the opposite party, constrained the complainant to resort to the Forum for redressal.

1. Inspite of the service of the notice of this Forum as to this case of the complainant, the opposite parties neither appeared before this Forum nor contested the case of the complainant filing any written version with any defences and thus remained exparte.

4.       While such is so with the opposite parties the complainant in substantiation of its case relied upon the documentary record in exhibits A.1 to A.3 besides to his sworn affidavit in re-iteration of the complaint averments.

5.       Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out the case of the deficiency on the part of the opposite parties towards him entitling him/her for the reliefs sought?:-

6.       The Ex A.1 F.D. Bond No.53 envisages the receipt of an amount of RS. 2,550/-from the complainant on date 9.2.94 by the opposite parties assuring the payment of RS.6,000/-

as maturity amount payable on dt 10.3.01. The Ex A.2 is the office copy of the legal notice

dt 25.2.03 caused on the opposite parties demanding the payment of maturity amount to the complainant takes the mention of the issual of Ex A.1  bond and the obligation of the opposite parties there under for the payment of assured matured amount.  The Ex A.3 is acknowledgement of the Ex.2 notice by the opposite party No. The facts envisaged in Ex A.1 to Ex A.3 and in the complaint and the complainant’s sworn affidavit are neither denied nor rebutted by the opposite parties side and hence there appears every bonafidies in the claim of the complainant basing on them.

7.       When a Company of Firm invites deposits on a promise of attractive rates of interest or attractive sums it is a service and the depositor is Consumer as per the decision of Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Commission, New Delhi in Neels Vasantha rajee V/S Amog Industries reported in 1993 (III) CPR page 345.

8.       When amounts under the Various deposits with accrued benefits not released to the Depositors by the Financial Institutions, said conduct of not honouring the said commitment amounts to deficiency and the financial institutions is liable to refund the accrued amount with 12% interest as per the decision of Hon’ble Maharastra State Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai in Sanchayani Savings and Investments (India) Limited V/s Vatsala Baba Saheb Gyquard reported in I(2003) CPJ page 260.

9.       In the present case also the opposite parties Firm inviting the public deposits on a promise  of  payment of double the amounts deposited on a tenure of 5 ½  years from the date of deposit and did not kept up the said commitment to the complainant depositor by  avoiding the payment of the matured amount.  Thus the said lapsive conduct of the opposite parties Firm is amounting to deficiency of service at the complainant Consumer depositor and thereby the grievances of the complainant are covered under the supra stated decisions holding the liability of the opposite parties Firm for refund of the accrued the matured amount with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the maturity.

1.           Therefore, in the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally as constituents of the said firm-to pay the complainant the matured amount of RS.6,000/- with 12% interest per annum from the date of maturity with costs of RS.1,000/- within a month of the receipt of the order.  In default, the opposite parties as the constituents of the said Firm shall jointly and severally liable to pay the supra awarded amount with 15%interest per annum from the date of the said default till realization of the entire awarded amount.

          Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the Dictation, corrected by us, Pronounced in the Open Court, this the 06^th day of November, 2003

PRESIDENT

          MEMBER                                                                                MEMBER

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For the Complainant                                                           For the opposite parties         

            -Nil-                                                                             -Nil-

List of Exhibits Marked

For the Complainant                                                           For the opposite parties

ExA.1 Fixed deposit Bond No.53                                                       -Nil-

Issued dt 9.2.94 maturity dt 10.3.01

For RS. 6,000/- under M.No.830

Issued by O.P’s to the complainant

ExA.2 Legal notice dt. 25.2.03

Issued by complainants counsel

To opposite party No.1

ExA.3 Acknowledgement of OP.No.1

Office for receipt of the Ex A.2

PRESIDENT

 MEMBER                                                                                                   MEMEBER