Before the District Forum Kurnool
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 10th day of March, 2005
C.D.No.132/2004
Kum.K.Naga Rathna,
D/o Sri.K.Ramaiah,
R/o Kurnool Town. . ..Complainant represented by his counsel
M.D.V.Jogaiah Sarma, Advocate.
-Vs-
- The Branch Manager,
Industrial Credit and Development Syndicate Limited,
H.No.40/326-16-B(Upstairs),
B.R.P. Complex,
Park Road,
Kurnool. . . . Opposite party
- The Managing Director,
Industrial Credit and Development Syndicate Limited,
Syndicate house,
Manipal-576119,
Uddpi District,
Karnataka State. . . . Opposite party
O R D E R
(As per Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, Member)
CC.No.132/2004
1. This consumer dispute case of the complainant is filed under section 12 of C.P. Act 1986, seeking a direction on the opposite parties to repay the maturity value of debentures together with interest over the maturity value at 14% interest per annum from the date of maturity till the date of payment, to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards damages, to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards costs of the complaint and to do such other and further things as this Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The gist of the complaint of the complainant is that the complainant had taken TWENTY FIVE “Secured Redeemable Non convertible Debentures” issued by the Company of the opposite parties, from the office of the First opposite party at Kurnool, which are of the face value of Rs.1,000/- each, on 01-04-1999 with Distinctive Nos.02051 to 02075 under Certificate No.BAC-50138 and Regd. FolioNo.21191,and another debenture with twenty five shares had taken by the complainant which are of the face value of Rs.1,000/- each on 01-03-2000 with distinctive Nos.04158 to 04182 under certificate No.CDC 50244 and Regd Folio No.47008 redeemable on 01-04-2004 and 01-03-2005 respectively. The In the said Debentures, the First opposite party had agreed to give interest over the debenture amount at the rate of 14% per annum from the date of the deposit till the date of redemption. Being so, after the date of maturity of the above said redemption date, when the complaint approached opposite party No.1 requesting for the redemption of the Debentures of the complaint, and also for the payment of the redemption value of the Debentures i.e., Rs.50,125/- and Rs.50,125/- respectively for the above said two debentures, the in-charge of the opposite party No.1 did not give any proper reply, and their replies were quite evasive and self contradictory, which could not be understood by the complainant. On repeated trips to the office of the opposite party No.1, the complainant noticed that the said office is slowly being wound up, and there is no enough staff therein, as they used to be earlier. The opposite party company being a reputed financial institution, and it having undertaken to give the maturity value of the Debentures of the complainant on their maturity, is bound under law of refund the maturity value of debentures of the complainant.
3. The complainant also got issued a legal notice dated 29.06.2004 calling upon the opposite parties to refund the maturity value of the debentures standing in the name of the complainant together with interest at 14% per annum over the maturity value of the Debentures, from the date of their maturity till the date of repayment. The opposite parties having received the said legal notice, instead of complying with the just and legal demand of the complainant, sent separate reply letters dated 01.07.2004 and 16.07.2004 respectively with all false and evasive replies to the complainant humbly submits that the claim of the opposite parties as pleaded in their reply letters that they had submitted a scheme before the Honorable High Court of Karnataka and they are awaiting its approval by the Honorable High Court is not within her knowledge, and she also humbly submits that it is only a ruse for the opposite partiers to delay and defeat the payment of the amount due to her over her debentures. In fact, the complainant had deposited the said sum with the opposite parties, for meeting the marital expenses of the proposed marriage of her daughter Kum Nagarathna who is now age 19 years. Through, the complainant is getting good matches for her daughter, she is not able to proceed ahead now with the said marriage proposals, due to the locking up of the amounts of the complainant with the opposite parties. This attitude of the opposite parties in unnecessarily delaying the refund of the maturity value of the debentures without assigning any tenable reason amounts to deficiency of service. Hence, the complainant approached this Forum seeking redressal for the above said grievances.
4. The complainant in support of her case filed the documents besides to her sworn affidavit in reiteration of her complaint averments and the above documents are marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 for its appreciation in this case.
5. In pursuance to the notice of this Forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite party No.1 submitted its written version along with the judgment of the Honorable High Court of Karnataka, at Bangalore and alleging the case of complainant is not maintainable as there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties to attract the provision of the C.P. Act and opposite party No.2 remained exparte.
6. The written version of the Opposite party No.1 submits that even assuming that the complainant version is true the opposite party No.2 was always apprising the complainant of the financial status of the company by way of reply to her notices and through other correspondence. In respect of the facts whether the predicament of the complainant is true or false, it is matter of public knowledge now that the opposite party company is indistress due to unforeseen changes in physical policies of R.B.I and other factors and it is brought to the notice of this Honorable Forum in the company petition No.201/2002 filed by the opposite party No.2 before the Honorable High Court of Karnataka. The final orders are passed formulating a scheme for the payment of deposits Debentures etc. The said order is marked as Ex.B1. In the said order the Honorable High Court of Karnataka observed that in view of the scheme being sanctioned and it can be gathered from the operative portion of the said order under Sub Clause (c) in page 94, all cases filed against the opposite party No.2 including National State and District For a shall stand abated. In view of the said orders, which are self explanatory and speaks for itself, this complaint also stand abated. The company (opposite partyNo.2) is bound to abide by the repayment scheme as detailed in the said orders (Ex.B1) as such this complaint is liable to be dismissed.
7. In support of its case the opposite party No.1 filed the true copy of the Judgment of the Honorable High Court of Karnataka, at Bangalore in company Petition No.201/202 and is marked as Ex.B1 for its appreciation in this case.
8. Hence the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any deficiency of the opposite parties towards her and there by her entitleness to the reliefs sought?
9. As there is no dispute about taking of the said “secured redeemable non convertible debentures “by the complaint which are issued by the Company (opposite party No.2). The Ex.A1 with two original debenture certificates No.BAC-50138 and CDC-50244 dated 01-04-1999 and 01-03-2000 respectively with 25 shares each at the rate of Rs.1,000/- with 14% interest per annum and the redemption period was 60 months with redemption date as 01.04.2004 and 01-03-2005 respectively their maturity value was Rs.50,125/- and Rs.50,125/- respectively. The Ex.A2 is the legal notice given by the complainant’s counsel on 29.06.2004 to the opposite parties and requested them to refund the matured value of the said debentures together with 14% interest per annum over the maturity value and with costs of the notice Rs.100/- within 7 days from the receipt of the said notice. The Ex.A3 is the registered acknowledge due reply letter dated 01.07.2004 to the legal notice of the complainant’s counsel (Ex.A2) informing that the matter was with the Honorable High Court of Karnataka, at Bangalore for its judgment, which was reserved by the said Honorable Court and further informed that the re-payment should be as per the judgment orders of the said Honorable High Court. The Ex.A4 and Ex.A5 are also are the letters addressed by the Opposite party No.2 dated 02.07.2004 and 16.07.2004 respectively to the complainant’s counsel re-iterating the facts which were already mentioned in its letter dated 01.07.2004 i.e., Ex.A3.
10. After taking into consideration the Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 and the Ex.B1 for their appreciation in this case and in view of the true copy of the Judgment Orders of the Honorable High Court of Karnataka, at Bangalore in the Company Petition No.201/202 (Ex.B1) which was filed by the Opposite party No.2 through the opposite party No.1 where in it clearly states under Sub Clause (c) in page 94, in view of the scheme being sanctioned under the said Judgment that all the criminal cases filed against the company, (opposite party No.2) as well as suits, execution petitions and Complaints/Appeals before the National Commission, State and District Consumer For a shall stand abated and the payments made in these proceedings be adjusted against the outstanding debts payable to such claimants.
11. In the result, in view of the above discussion and particularly the true copy of Judgment Order of the Honorable High Court of Karnataka, at Bangalore, (Ex.B1) the complaint of the complainant is not entertain able in this Forum and is dismissed.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the Dictation corrected by us, Pronounced in the Open Court this the 10th day of March, 2005.
MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite parties :- Nil
List of Exhibits Marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 With two Original debenture certificate NO.BAC 50138 and CDC 50244 dated 01.04.2004 and 01-03-2005 issued to the complainant by the opposite party No.2
Ex.A2 Is the Legal Notice issued dated 29.06.2004 issued by complainant’s counsel to the opposite parties
Ex.A3 The Registered Acknowledgement.
Ex.A4 Letter dated 02.07.2004 addressed by General Manager to the complainant’s Counsel.
Ex.A5 Letter dated 16.07.2004 addressed by the opposite party No.2 to the complainant’s counsel.
List of Exhibits Marked for the opposite parties:- Nil
MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
