BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANGALORE

Dated this the 15^th December2016

PRESENT

        SMT. C.V. SHOBHA            :  HON’BLE PRESIDENT 

      SMT.LAVANYA M. RAI        :   HON’BLE MEMBER                                         

COMPLAINT NO.314/2016

        (Admitted on 19.09.2016)

Sri. S.Padmanabha,

S/o Late ThimmappaGowda,

Aged about 56 years,

Residing at Sulli House,

Nellurukemraje Village,

Post Doddathoa, SulliaTaluk, D.K.

                                                                 ……… Complainant 

(Advocate for Complainant by Sri. TP)         

VERSUS

1. The South Kanara Agriculturists Co

Operative Marketing Society Ltd. No.3901,

APMC Building, P.B.No.159, mission Street,

Mangalore D.K.575001.

Represented by its Managing Director,

2. The Liquidator/The SKACMS. Ltd,

The Assistant Registrar of Co Operative Societies,

4^th Floor, S.C.D.C.C. Bank old Building 

K.S.Rao Road, Kodialbail, Mangalore 575003.

                                                                                                      …. Opposite Parties

 (Opposite Party No.1 and 2: Ex parte)

ORDER DELIVERED BY HONBLE PRESIDENT

SMT. C.V. SHOBHA:

I.       1. The above complaint is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties claiming certain reliefs.  

The brief facts of the case are as under:

The Complainant deposited certain sum of money with the Opposite Parties and the Opposite Parties are registered society having its registered office in the above address. The details of the amounts deposited with the Opposite Party society mentioned in detail herein below:

Complainant stated that, he has invested his hard earned money in Opposite Parties co operative society under the fixed deposit receipts for the stipulated period mentioned there in and the Opposite Parties in turn agreed to pay interest as mentioned in the certificates.  Further it is stated that, the Opposite Parties in spite of agreed to refund the aforesaid amount on the date of maturity mentioned in the respective F.D. Receipts and amount invested in SB A/c not refunded the amount till this date.

It is stated that, the Complainant approached the Opposite Parties, the Opposite Parties have been indefinitely postponing the money payable under the F.D. Receipts and SB A/c amount without assigning any valid reasons which amounts to deficiency in service and hence the above complaint is filed before this Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (herein after referred to as the Act) seeking direction from this Forum to the Opposite Parties to pay the entire Deposited amount invested by him and also sought for compensation and cost of the proceedings.

II.      1. Version notice served to the Opposite Parties by RPAD. Opposite Party No. 1 and 2 inspite of receiving the same neither appeared nor contested the case before this FORA, hence, Opposite Party No.1 and 2 placed as an ex parte.  The acknowledgment marked as court document. In support of the above complaint, Sri.S.Padmanabha, Complainant is examined himself as CW1 and produced documents got marked under the Ex.C series detailed in the annexure here below.  The opposite parties not led any evidence.

III.     In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this case are as under:

1. Whether the complainant proves that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service?
2. If so, whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed?
3. What order?

           We have considered the arguments submitted by the learned counsel and also considered the materials that was placed before this Forum and answer the points are as follows:

               Point No. (i) & (ii): Affirmative.

               Point No. (iii): As per the final order. 

REASONS

IV. POINTS No. (i) & (ii):

In the instant case, the Complainant in order to substantiate the averments made in his complaint filed evidence on affidavit supported by fixed deposit receipts i.e. Ex.C series mentioned in the annexure in detail.  The Complainants sworn affidavit stating that the Fixed Deposits are matured but the Opposite Parties keep on assured to refund the amount by giving one or the other excuses and postponing the payment without valid reasons deliberately. However, now the point for consideration is that, whether the Complainant is entitled for the amount mentioned in the Fixed Deposit Receipts and amount deposited in SB A/c the Opposite Parties have committed deficiency in service? On perusal of the oral as well as documentary evidence available on record, we find that the Complainant deposited the hard earned money under the Fixed Deposit Receipts and amount deposited in SB A/c with the Opposite Parties and the Opposite Parties in turn agreed to refund the amount along with the accrued interest on the date of maturity mentioned in the respective F.D. Receipts.  We are of the considered opinion that, in a case of like this nature reciprocal promises were enshrined in the contract/certificate entered/issued between the parties are  obliged to perform in that Order.  No doubt the Complainant invested certain sum of money under the Fixed Deposit Receipts for a particular period and amount deposited in SB A/c with the Opposite Parties and the Opposite Parties in turn received the said invested amount from the Complainant and agreed to refund the aforesaid amount along with the agreed interest on the date of maturity and SB A/c amount. When that being so, it is the obligation on the part of the Opposite Parties Co operative society to refund the amount to the Complainant on the date of maturity of the stipulated time, because the Opposite Parties make use of the money pertaining to the Complainant in their society and agreed to refund the amount with interest.  When that being the position, the Opposite Parties society should have refunded the amount to the Complainant without any demand and delay.  As we know, the financial institutions are facing financial crunches and caused problems to the depositor and keep on seeking/postponing the payment by giving one or the other reasons are common in a case of like this nature.  By considering the transactions involved in the above case, we are of the opinion that, cause of action will be continued till the payment invested under the certificate are received by the Complainant.  It is not the case of the Opposite Parties that, they have offered the payment on the date of maturity or subsequent dates till this date. In the given case the Opposite Parties are neither appeared nor contested the case before Fora, hence Opposite Party No.1 and 2 placed ex parte.  The complainant deposited amounts with the opposite parties as averred by him in the complaint seeking refund of the amount.  The opposite parties did not refund the amount till this date, in order to escape from liability.  Hence, we hold that both the opposite parties are jointly and severally held liable and responsible to make the good of the complainant. By considering the above aspects, we hold that, on failure to pay the aforesaid amount on the date of maturity till this date amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice.    Therefore, we hereby directed the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 to pay the entire amount mentioned in the Fixed Deposit Receipt total for a sum of Rs.50,000 / along with contractual rate of interest from the respective date of deposits till the date of payment in full and amount in SB A/c for a sum of Rs 865/ with accrued interest at 10% p.a from 28.10.2011 and 22.11.2012 till payment and further pay Rs.5,000/ (Rupees five thousand only) towards the cost of the litigation expenses.  Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

     In the present case interest considered by this Forum itself is compensation and therefore no separate amount for compensation is awarded.

     In the result, we pass the following:

ORDER

The complaint is allowed in part.  The Opposite Parties No.1 and No.2 are jointly and severally shall refund for a sum of Rs. 50,000/  (Rupees fifty thousand only) cash deposits with accrued interest at the 11.5% p.a from i.e. 20.10.2012 and 22.11.2012 the date of deposit till the date of payment. And amount in SB A/c for a sum of Rs. 865/ (Rupees eight hundred sixty five only) with accrued interest at the 10% p.a. from 28.10.2011 till payment and further to pay Rs. 5,000/(Rupees Five thousand only) towards cost of the litigation expenses.  Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

The F.D.R. if any deposited by the Complainant be returned fourth with by substituting the certified.

The copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties and therefore the file be consigned to record.

(Page No.1 to 7 directly dictated by President to computer system to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 15^th day of December 2016.)

                MEMBER                                      PRESIDENT

   (SMT.LAVANYA M. RAI)                  (SMT. C.V. SHOBHA)

    D.K. District Consumer Forum             D.K. District Consumer Forum

                    Mangalore.                                          Mangalore.        

ANNEXURE

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:

CW1: Sri.S.Padmanabha.

 Documents marked on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex C1: 20.10.2012: Original fixed deposit number 01366 for a sum of Rupees 50,000 issued by the Opposite Party No.1.

Ex C2: 22.11.2012: Original fixed deposit number 003855 for a sum of Rupees 50,000 issued by the Opposite Party No.1.

Ex C3: 28.10.2011: Original S.B. Account pass book No.135 issued by the Opposite Party No.1.

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Parties:

Nil

Documents Marked on behalf of the Opposite Parties:   

Nil

Dated: 15.12.2016.                                       PRESIDENT