BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM, KURNOOL
Present: Sri.K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., Honourable President
And
Smt.C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Honourable Lady Member
Monday the 12th day of February, 2007
C.C.No.43/2006
M.Pedda Kistanna, S/o Late Manke Lalappa, Aged about 55 years, Hindu, Cultivation,
R/o Marella Village, Thuggali Mandalam, Kurnool District.
… Complainant
-Vs-
1.The Secretary,Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Society Limited,
No.Y-888, Marella Ashoka, Thuggali Mandalam, Kurnool District.
2.The Branch Manager,District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited,
Pathikonda Branch, Pathikonda Mandalam, Kurnool District.
3.The General Manager, District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited,
Opp.Government General Hospital, Kurnool.
… Opposite Parties
This complaint coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.P.Ramanjaneyulu, Advocate, Kurnool for complainant, and Sri.K.Ramakrishna Rao, Advocate for opposite parties 1 to 3 and stood over for consideration till this day, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
As per Sri.K.V.H.Prasad, Hon’ble President
C.C.No.43/06
1. This case of the complainant is filed seeking an order against the opposite parties to pay him Rs.50,000/- towards the maturity amount with 18% interest from 27-03-2004 (i.e., date of maturity)till realization, Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and cost of Rs.3,000/- alleging the deposit by him on 27-03-1999 an amount of Rs.25,000/- with the opposite parties for a period of five years for a maturity value of Rs.50,000/- and its surrender on the date of maturity for encashment and the deficiency of opposite parties, in collusion with each other, issuing him a fresh deposit receipt for Rs.25,000/- on 31-03-2004 for maturity value of Rs.33,653/- adjusting the balance of mature amount of Rs.25,000/- towards the outstanding the loan as to tractor and trailor instead of making payment of the mature of said deposit receipt, inspite of his protest as said loan was secured on sufficient mortgage security of landed property and giving false reply on 21-12-2004 to the notice dated:26-11-2004 of complainant in this regard.
2. In pursuance of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant, the opposite parties caused there appearance through their counsel and contested the case denying their liability to the complainant’s claim.
3. The written version of the opposite party No.1- secretary Primary Agriculture Co-operative society Teggali- besides requiring strict proof of complainant’s case as to alleged deficiencies of services, deny in his service relationship with complainant for any paid consideration. It further alleges the complainant’s payment of Rs.25,000/- independently towards the outstanding loan of tractor and trailor prior to encashing of mature amount of F.D.R. of 27-03-1999 and after encashing the said F.D.R. dated:27-03-1999 for its mature amount the complainant himself voluntarily investing from it Rs.25,000/- with opposite party No.2 creating a charge thereon towards tractor loan and its custody with opposite partyNo.2 till the tractor loan is cleared and the complainant’s any nexus with opposite party No.3 in this regard and so seeking dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4. The written version of the opposite party No.2 besides requiring the strict proof of complaint allegations alleges the sanction of tractor loan to the complainant subject to furnishing of a F.D.R. of Rs.25,000/- for a period of five years and the complainant furnishing to opposite party No.2 F.D.R. No.000694/3B dated:08-01-1999 for Rs.25,000/- and the discharge of said F.D.R. by complainant on 31-03-2004 receiving its maturity value of Rs.50,000/- and out of said amount the complainant investing an amount of Rs.25,000/- for obtaining a fresh F.D.R. for Rs.25,000/- for a period of four years as has to maintain an F.D.R. of Rs.25,000/- till entire tractor loan is cleared as per the terms and conditions are said loan and voluntarily crediting the residuary amount of Rs.25,000/- towards tractor loan and on said F.D.R. the complainant is not entitled to raise any loan and the cause for filing this case as the complainant was refused any loan on this F.D.R. and as the case of the complainant is in suppression of real facts as to said loan and its governing terms and conditions and refusal of loan to him, there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party No.2 towards complainant in compliance of the terms and conditions of said loan and the provisions of co-operative society act which governs the opposite party No.2 and the case being involving complicated questions of law and facts under co-operative society acts and it cannot be answered in summary enquiry by this forum, seeks dismissal of the complainant’s case with costs.
5. The written version of the opposite party No.3 besides questioning the justness, and maintainability of this case in law and requiring strict proof of complaint averments alleges sanction of credit facility to the complainant for purchase of tractor vide memo dated:15-08-1998 and it compliance of the terms and conditions of said memo the compliant furnishing F.D.R. number 000694/3B dated:08-01-1999 for Rs.25,000/- with maturity value of Rs.50,000/- to 08-03-2004 besides complain other formalities and on said F.D.R. any loan could be entertainable and the complainant receiving its maturity value of Rs.50,000/- on 31-03-2004 surrendering the said F.D.R. and furnishing a fresh F.D.R. No.013210/7 on 31-03-2004 of Rs.25,000/- for a maturity value of Rs.33,653/- on to 31-03-2008 in compliance of the conditions of loan for subsisting tractor loan and the complainant voluntarily remitting an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards the tractor loan and the cause for the complaint as refusal of the loan to complainant on this F.D.R. dated:31-03-2004 and there services were free of any charge and so for want of proper cause of action seeks dismissal of the complaint with costs.
6. In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant’s side has taken reliance on documentary record in Ex.A1 to A9 besides to its sworn affidavit and replies to the interrogatories, the opposite parties side has taken reliance on documentary records in Ex.B1 to B4 besides to its sworn affidavit and replies to the interrogatories.
7. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and thereby any of their liability to the claim of the complainant.
8. The Ex.A1 is receipt dated:11-01-1999 issued by the opposite party No.1 to the complainant. It envisages receipt of Rs.29,600/- from the complainant towards the detail particulars mentioned in said Ex.A1. The fact mentioned in it being nor denied by the opposite parties the said Ex.A1 remains proved of its contents.
9. The Ex.A2 is receipt dated:27-03-2004 issued by opposite party No.1 to the complainant it envisages receipt of Rs.25,000/- from complainant towards loan number 1-4-04 – 362/4P while the complainant alleges that he did not main any such payment and the opposite party is merely showing the said payment in order to avoid liability for the mature amount of in the earlier F.D.R. which was surrendered on 27-03-2004 for its maturity value, the opposite party denying the same. If the said Ex.A2 receipt was a created one by the opposite party No.1- without the truth therein- its custody with the complainant is giving raise to every doubt on the truthfulness of complainant’s said contentions in that regard especially when said remittance of Rs.25,000/- is reflected in collection colum of Ex.B1 on said dated:27-03-2004.
10. The Ex.A3 is receipt dated:31-03-2004 for amount of Rs.25,000/- said to have been issued by opposite party No.2 to the complainant for issuing F.D.R. the Ex.A4 is a F.D.R. bearing number 013210 dated:31-03-2004 for Rs.25,000/- in favour of the complainant for its maturity value of Rs.33,653/- on to 31-03-2008. If the F.D.R. was not originated at the complainant’s remittance of said amount under Ex.A3 to opposite party No.2, the custody of Ex.A3 and A4 with the complainant giving raise to any amount of doubt and suspicion on the contentions of the complainant as to their creation by the opposite parties to avoid their liability to pay the mature amount under earlier F.D.R.
11. The complainant except alleging that the earlier F.D.R. maturing for Rs.50,000/- was encashed by him on 27-03-2004 and on that day itself the opposite party issued a fresh F.D.R. for a residuary amount of Rs.25,000/- adjusting Rs.25,000/- out of maturity amount of Rs.50,000/- towards loan, did not place any cogent substantiating material as to said encashment of earlier F.D.R. on 27-03-2004 and issual of any fresh F.D.R. for Rs.25,000/- on 27-03-2004 itself. But on the other hand the written version of the opposite parties and the Ex.B4-earlier F.D.R. dated:08-01-1999 which was said to have acquired maturity value of Rs.50,000/- on 08-03-2004 – bears endorsement of the said bank as to its encashment on 31-03-2004 and issual of a fresh F.D.R. in Ex.A4 for Rs.25,000/- on the same date of 31-03-2004. If the payment of Rs.25,000/- under Ex.A2 dated:27-03-2004 is not an independent one made by the complainant and if have any concern with the mature amount Ex.B4 and its encashment on 31-03-2004 the said payment of Rs.25,000/- evidence in Ex.A2 on 27-03-2004 shall be an impossibility. Hence, in the circumstances there appears any bonafidies in the contentions of the complainants theory that an amount of Rs.25,000/- was deducted towards the tractor loan account for residuary of amount Rs.25,000/- only a fresh F.D.R. in Ex.A2 was issued without making any cash payment under Ex.B4 earlier F.D.R. especially when the endorsement on reverse of Ex.B4 envisages the order for payment of cash .
12. The Ex.A5 is the office copy of legal notice dated 26-11-2004 along with its acknowledgment opposite party No.2. Even though it alleges that deception was played on him by the opposite party No.2 at the time of surrender the earlier F.D.R. of the year 1999 on 27-03-2004 the said allegations as were denied by the opposite party No.2 in its reply in Ex.A6 and as discussing the earlier paras as there appears any bonafidies in the contentions of the complainant in alleged theory of adjustment of Rs.25,000/- towards and issual of new F.D.R. from the mature amount of Rs.50,000/- earlier F.D.R. encashing it on 27-03-2004, the Ex.A5 remains of any avail to the case of the complainant.
13. The Ex.A7 is a form of notice of transfer of ownership of motor vehicle issued by Additional Registering Authority Adoni, on 13-07-2004 on the application of complainant for transfer of tractor mentioned therein, infavour of K.Sambasiva Reddy and the Ex.A8 in the notice of termination of an agreement of hire purchase/lease /hypothecation on the application of complainant under counter signature of secretary- Marelle Ashoka P.A.C.C. addressed to the Registering Authority Kurnool intimating termination of hire purchase, / lease/hypothecation entered in that regard and requesting thereby to cancel the note endorsement in the certificate of registration of vehicle number AP21/B/7584 + 7585 (tractor + trailor) enclosing thereto a certificate of registration and the necessary fees for needful and the endorsement Additional Registering Authority Adoni, dated:13-07-2004 as required effecting cancellation of entries of agreement in their office registration record in form 24 and registration certificate. The Ex.A9 is entries of form 24 – B-registered of Motor vehicles issued by Additional Registering Authority Adoni as to the tractor + trailor is bearing registered number Ap21/B-7584 sold by complainant in favour of said K.Sambasiva Reddy with effect from 13-07-2004.
14. The Ex.A7 is to A9 being relating to the termination of agreement if lease/hypothecation /hire purchase on said tractor, by their date of 13-07-2004 being subsequent to said crucial date of 27-03-2004 and 31-03-2004, to which cause of action was alleged by the complainant these Ex.A7 to A9 bear any relevancy for their appreciation in adjudication of matters in controversy in this case.
15. The Ex.B3 is a carbon counter foil of the receipt number 37608 dated:22-09-2003 issued by Marelle Ashok P.A.C.C. in favour of the complainant as to receipt of Rs.8,200/- from the complainant for the particulars mentioned therein. As there is any pleading as to this receipt aspect the Ex.B3 bears any relevancy for its appreciation in this case.
16. In the circumstances discussed in supra paras as there appears any bonafidies in the contentions and grievances of the complainant making out any deficiency of services of the opposite parties the complainant is remaining entitled to any of the claims at the liability of the opposite parties.
17. Consequently, there being any merit and force in the case of the complainant it is dismissed. In the circumstances each party to the case proceedings do bear there costs.
Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced in the Open Bench on this the 12th day of February, 2007.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant: Nill For the Opposite parties:Nill
List of Exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Original receipt No.119934, dated 11-01-1999 issued by opposite party No.1 for Rs.29,789.70 Ps.
Ex.A2 Original Receipt No.101125 dated 27-03-2004 for Rs.25,000/-.
Ex.A3 Original Receipt dated 31-03-2004 in favour of complainant for Rs.25,000/-.
Ex.A4 Original Deposit Receipt No.013210/7B dated 31-03-2004 for Rs.25,000/- for tenure of 4 years to a maturity value of Rs.33,653/-.
Ex.A5 Office copy of legal notice dated 26-11-2004 along with postal acknowledgement.
Ex.A6 Reply notice dated 21-12-2004 to Ex.A5
Ex.A7 Form-29 issued by Additional Registering Authority M.V. Inspector (Unit office), Adonit dated 13-07-2004.
Ex.A8 Form-35 issued by Additional Registering Authority M.V. Inspector (Unit office) Adoni dated 13-07-2004.
Ex.A9 Extract of Form-21B Register of Motor Vehicle issued by Additional Registering Authority, M.V. Inspector (Unit Office) Adoni dated 15-12-2005.
List of Exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Attested Xerox copy of ledger extract of A/c No.362 of the complainant.
Ex.B2 Attested Xerox copy of Memo, dated 15-08-1998 of opposite party No.3 to opposite party No.2 for processing the loan application.
Ex.B3 Office copy of receipt No.137608 dated 22-09-2003.
Ex.B4 Discharged F.D.R. No.000694/3 B. dated 08-01-1999.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to:
- Sri.P.Ramanjaneyulu, Advocate, Kurnool.
- Sri.K.Ramakrishna Rao, Advocate, Kurnool.
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
Copy was delivered to parties :
