By Smt Padmini Sudheesh, President <br /> <br /> The complainant’s case is follows:<br /> <br /> The original complainant Kiran was a minor at the time of filing the complaint. Now he became major, but he is in abroad and the father is represented and affidavit is filed on behalf. He knows the facts of the case. He had joined a kuri in the respondent firm in the name of his son Kiran on 12/9/1996. He had paid Rs.2500/- as monthly instalments for 30 months and the kuri terminated on 12/2/1999 by 30 months. On 12/1/1999 he had auctioned the kuri, The respondents had assured that they will pay the kuri amount of Rs.2,10,000/- on 12/2/99. On that assurance he had auctioned the kuri. But the amount was not paid. Lawyer notice sent and it was accepted by 2nd respondent, but unclaimed by respondents 3 to 7. There is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of respondents. Hence this complaint.<br /> <br /> 2. Respondents are declared exparte. To prove the case petitioner has filed affidavit and seven documents which are marked Exhibits P1 to P7.<br /> <br /> 3. According to the complainant he is entitled for Rs.2,10,000/- and 12% interest. He also claimed Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and also costs.<br /> <br /> 4. There is no evidence to the contrary.<br /> <br /> 5. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay Rs.2,10,000/- (Rupees Two lakh and ten thousand only) to the complainant with 12% interest from 12/2/1999 till realization. Further directed to pay cost of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand and five hundred only). Comply the order within 2 months.<br /> <br /> Dictated to the Confdl. Asst., transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 25th day of August 2008.<br />