Andhra Pradesh

Nellore

CC/86/2014

Doniparthi Bhaskar - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.The divisional manager, Agrigold Farm Estates India Private Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

S.K.Abdulsamath

21 Jan 2016

ORDER

Date of Filing     :26-11-2014

                                                                                                Date of Disposal:21-01-2016

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM:NELLORE

Thursday, this the 21^st day of  January, 2016

 

PRESENT: Sri M. Subbarayudu Naidu, B.Com.,B.L.,LL.M.,President(FAC) & Member                             

                   Sri N.S. Kumara Swamy, B.Sc.,LL.B., Member.

 

C.C.No.86/2014

 

Doniparthi Bhaskar, S/o.Narayanaiah,

Hindu, Aged about 45 years, Resident of D.No.2/120,

Allipuram (Village & Post),

Nellore.                                                                                               ..… Complainant    

                                                                           Vs.

 

1.	The Divisional Manager, Agrigold Farm  Estates India Private Limited, Brindavanam, Nellore.
2.	The Managing Director, Agrigold Farm Estates India Private Limited, Registered and Administrative  Office, Surya Towers, M.G.Road, Vijayawada-520010.                                                                    ..…Opposite parties

                                                              .  

            This complaint coming on 18-01-2016 before us for hearing in the presence of                Sri Sk. Abdul Samath, advocate for the complainant and                                                         opposite party No.1 called absent and Sri  C. Rajasekhar Reddy, advocate for the opposite party  No.2  and having stood over for consideration till this day and this Forum made the following:

 

ORDER

(ORDER BY  Sri N.S. KUMARA SWAMY, MEMBER)

 

This complaint is filed under Section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay compensation of Rs.60,000/- for deficiency in service  etc., in not paying the maturity value as promised, to pay  interest at 24% p.a. on Rs.1,00,000/- from the date of it’s  maturity i.e., 01-04-2014 till 06-11-2014 after deducting Rs.3,945/- with subsequent interests thereon at 12% p.a. from th date of complaint till realization, Rs.102/- towards bouncing charges collected by the banker of the complainant and costs of Rs.5,000/-.

 

2.         The brief averments of the complaint  are that  upon  wide publicity about their  fixed  deposit schemes by the opposite parties, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/- wide  F.D. bearing No.LS/842970 on 01-10-2007 which matures after completion of 6 years and 6 months i.e., by 01-04-2014 for Rs.1,00,000/-.  The said amount was invested for the purpose of complainant’s daughters education.  Whileso on 01-04-2014, the complainant  approached alongwith original bond with the 1^st opposite party  requesting to pay the maturity  value and several requests the opposite parties issued a cheque bearing No.083839 for Rs.1,00,000/- on 30-08-2014 i.e.,  after lapse of           7 months and the complainant received the same with a fond hope  that the said amount is to be useful for paying the  B.Tech., fees of his daughter  namely Swetha, who is studying B.Tech., The said cheque was presented on  30-08-2014 itself and the same was dishonoured by the banker  with an endorsement as funds insufficient and collected Rs.102/- towards  bouncing charges.  The complainant got issued legal notice through his counsel demanding the opposite parties to pay the dishonored cheque amount with interest.  After receipt of the said notice, the opposite parties paid Rs.1,00,000/- on               06-11-2014 towards maturity value and Rs.3,945/- towards additional interest only till August, 2014.  The said amounts were paid by the opposite parties with a delay of more than 7 months.  Due to that the very purpose of investing the said amount is in vain and complainant paid the college fees of his daughter by taking hand loans with difficulty.  The complainant obtained  hand loan of Rs.50,000/- from one V. Chenna Krishnaiah under promissory note dated 05-05-2014 by paying 3% interest p.m.  in view of urgency of paying the college fees of his daughter.  The complainant further alleged that  the opposite parties are liable to pay damages and further interest from the date of maturity i.e., 01-04-2014 till the date of realization besides  paying bouncing charges of Rs.102/- and also damages for mental agony.  Hence, the complaint for gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.

 

            3.         Notices sent to opposite parties 1 and 2 by registered post with acknowledgement due. The opposite party No.1 called absent.   Subsequently substitute service by way of paper publication published in praja sakthi against opposite party No.1 for their appearances.  When opposite party No.1 called on 16-10-2015, opposite party No.1 absent and no representation on their behalf.  Opposite Party No.2 present but  subsequently opposite party No.2 also did not file  written version inspite of granting several adjournments.  Hence, treated as no defence on the side of opposite parties 1               and 2.

 

            4.         On the other hand, the complainant filed chief affidavit as P.W.1 and marked  Exs.A1 to A7.  Heard the arguments on the side of complainant and proceeded with  as there was no contest on the side of opposite parties.  Perused the material papers on record.

 

            5.         The points for determination would be:

 

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties, if so?  Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed for?
2. To what relief?

 

            6.         POINT No.1:  It is an admitted fact that complainant deposited an amount of Rs.50,000/- under F.D. bearing No.LS/842970 on  01-10-2007  which matures  after completion of 6 years  and 5 months i.e., by 01-04-2014 for Rs.1,00,000/- .  As seen from the evidence on affidavit placed by him would clearly goes to show  that the complainant deposited  an amount of Rs.50,000/- with the opposite parties under receipt No.842970, which is Ex.A1.  Soonafter completion of the deposit period term, the complainant approached the 1^st opposite party on 01-04-2014 with the receipt Ex.A1 and on several requests made, the opposite parties issued a cheque bearing No.083839 for Rs.1,00,000/- on 30-08-2014 i.e., after lapse of 4 months and 29 days viz. Ex.A2.  But the said cheque was dishonoured by the banker with an endorsement as ‘funds insufficient’ vide Ex.A3.  The bankers collected Rs.102/-  towards bouncing charges which was debited in the complainant’s account vide pass book entries dated 30-08-2014, which is Ex.A7.  Subsequently, a legal notice  dated 22-09-2014 issued which is Ex.A4 demanding to pay the  dishonoured cheque amount with interest. On the demand notice, the opposite parties paid  Rs.1,00,000/- on 06-11-2014 towards maturity value and Rs.3,945/- towards additional interest  only till August, 2014. The  delay in payment of deposited amount and did not comply the request of complainant within time would certainly amounts to deficiency in service.  Unscrupulous traders after taking amounts  from the parties does not  perform the part of obligation should not be spared.  The unnecessary delay in payment caused the complainant  mental agony.  Such type of attitude on the part of opposite parties  should not be encouraged, if the said  attitude is continued to be allowed definetly  consumer will loose confidence on depositing amounts  in opposite party’s firms and  it also affects  goodwill of business at large.  We find no bonafidies  on the part of opposite parties as they have not placed  any material contrary to the evidence placed by the  complainant for which the complainant cannot be penalized.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled for  payment of compensation and also interest besides the payment of bouncing charges  as well as costs for the deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. 

 

            7.         The complainant made a claim for direction to the opposite parties to pay interest  on  Rs.1,00,000/- from 01-04-2014 to 06-11-2014  on the ground that there is deficiency in service which resulted in delay of payments  in the amount . Though the delay is not abnormal and taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum fees that  complainant is entitled to grant interest at 9% p.a. Coming to the amount of compensation claimed at Rs.60,000/- for deficiency in service, this Forum feels that it is an excessive and exhorbitant.  Considering the facts of this case, this Forum feels that compensation of Rs.10,000/- besides the costs of Rs.3,000/- can be awarded for the latches on the part of opposite parties.  Accordingly, the point No.1 is answered. 

 

            8.         POINT No.2:  In the result,  the complaint is  partly allowed directing the opposite parties, jointly and severally to pay  an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards compensation for deficiency in service  and also to pay interest   on Rs.1,00,000/-  at 9% p.a. from the date of maturity i.e., 01-04-2014 to 06-11-2014 after deducting Rs.3,945/- which was already paid by the opposite party.  The opposites parties  are further directed to pay Rs.102/- (Rupees one hundred and two only) towards bouncing  charges collected by the banker of the complainant besides the costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only).

 

            The above said amounts shall be paid within a month from the date of this order, failing which the amounts awarded shall carry interest at 9% p.a.

 

Typed to the dictation to the Stenographer, corrected  and pronounced by us in the open  Forum, this the 21^st day of  January, 2016.

 

 

                 Sd/-                                                                                     Sd/-

           MEMBER                                                                               PRESIDENT(F.A.C.)

 

                                                APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

Witnesses Examined for the complainant

 

P.W.1  -

30-11-2015

Sri Doniparthi Bhaskar, S/o.Narayanaiah, Nellore. (chief examination filed)

 

Witnesses Examined for the opposite parties

-Nil-

 

                             EXHIBITS MARKED FOR THE COMPLAINANT

 

Ex.A1  -	01-10-2007	Photocopy of  receipt No.842970 in favour of complainant issued by the  opposite party for Rs.1,00,000/-.
Ex.A2  -	30-08-2014	Photocopy of  Demand Draft  No.083839 for Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of complainant issued by the Axis Bank, Vijayawada.
Ex.A3  -	01-09-2014	Photocopy of Return Memo  in instalment No.083839 for Rs.1,00,000/-.
Ex.A4  -	22-09-2014	Legal notice from complainant’s advocate to the  opposite parties.
Ex.A5  -	05-05-2014	Photocopy of promissory note for Rs.50,000/- on                 05-05-2014 in the name of  Veerapaneni Chenna Krishnaiah.
Ex.A6  -	06-11-2014	Photocopy of Demand Draft No.597103 in favour of complainant for Rs.1,00,000/- issued by ING Vysya Bank Limited.
Ex.A7  -	-	Photocopy of  Savings Bank Account No.80530700387 in favour of complainant issued by State Bank of India, Nellore Town Branch.

 

                         EXHIBITS MARKED FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES

-Nil-

 

 

                                                                                                              

                                                                                                                   Id/-

                                                                                                         PRESIDENT(F.A.C.)

 

Copies to:

 

1.	Sri Sk. Abdul Samath Advocate, Nellore.
2.	The Divisional Manager, Agrigold Farm  Estates India Private Limited, Brindavanam, Nellore.
3.	Sri C. Rajasekhar Reddy, Advocate, Nellore.

 

 

Date when free copy was issued: