BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANGALORE
Dated this the 30TH November 2010
PRESENT
SMT. ASHA SHETTY : PRESIDENT
SMT.LAVANYA M. RAI : MEMBER
SRI. ARUN KUMAR.K : MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO.195/2010
(Admitted on 17.7.2010)
1. Mr.N.P.Mallya,
So. Late Vaikunta Mallya,
Of age 70 years, Hindu,
Main Road,
Puttur.
2. Mrs. Jayanthi Mallya,
W/o. Mr.N.P.Mallya,
Hindu, Main Road,
Puttur. …….. COMPLAINANTS
(Advocate for Complainant: Sri.Deenanath Shetty)
VERSUS
1. Authorised Signatory,
Vijaya Leasing Limited,
Opp: Bazzar Post Office,
Main Road, Puttur.
2. Branch manager,
Vijaya Commercial Credit Limited,
Centenary Building, 28,
M.G.Road,
Bangalore. ….. OPPOSITE PARTIES
(Opposite Parties: Exparte)
ORDER DELIVERED BY PRESIDENT SMT. ASHA SHETTY:
This complaint is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service as against the Opposite Parties claiming certain reliefs.
The brief facts of the case are as under:
The Complainants submits that, they are senior citizens and they had invested the amount under cumulative deposits before the Opposite Party No.1. The particulars of the deposits are as under:
Sl. No. | Receipt No. | Amount Deposited | Date of Deposit | Maturity Amount | Date of Maturity | Interest |
1 | 02281111 | 16,000/- | 5.6.1998 | 21,552/- | 6.6.2000 | 15% |
2 | 01281023 | 15,000/- | 6.6.1998 | 20,205/- | 7.6.2000 | 15% |
3 | 01283696 | 16,000/- | 8.11.1998 | 18,400/- | 9.11.1999 | 14% |
4 | 02285597 | 16,000/- | 3.12.1998 | 18,400/- | 4.12.1999 | 14% |
5 | 02284320 | 16,000/- | 3.10.1998 | 18,400/- | 4.10.1999 | 14% |
The Complainants submitted that, even after elapse of 11 years the Opposite Party No.1 not made any payment but they have protracted the payment of the maturity value on one or the other pretext. Thus they have committed deficiency in rendering service and hence, the above complaint filed the 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 aforesaid maturity values of the amounts deposited under the respective CDRs (herein after called as “Cumulative Deposit Receipts”) along with accrued interest to the Complainants. Further prayed for compensation and cost of the proceedings.
2. Version notice served to the Opposite Parties by RPAD. Opposite Parties despite of serving notice neither appeared nor contested the case till this date. Hence, we have proceeded exparte as against the Opposite Party No.1 and 2. The acknowledgement placed on the file of this FORA marked as Court Document No.1.
3. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this case are as under:
- Whether the complaint is maintainable before this Fora?
- Whether the Complainant proves that Opposite Parties committed deficiency in service?
- If so, whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed?
- What order?
4. In support of the complaint, the Complainants – Mr.N.P.Mallya (CW1) and Mrs.Jayanthi Mallya (CW2) filed affidavit reiterating what has been stated in the complaint and Ex C1 to C12 are produced as listed in the annexure. The Opposite Parties placed exparte.
We have heard and perused the pleadings, documents and evidence placed on record by the Complainant and answer the points are as follows:
Point No.(i) : Negative
Point No.(ii) to (iv): As per the final order.
REASONS
5. POINT No. (i):
We have noticed that, in the instant case, the Opposite Parties filed Company Petition No.125 and 126/2002 before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, which is pending for disposal. We further noticed that, the official liquidator has been appointed in Company Petition No.125 and 126/2002. We are of the considered opinion that, in view of the appointment of official liquidator in Company Petitions filed by the Opposite Parties, the Complainants are directed to approach before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Company Petition before the official liquidator instead of approaching before this FORA.
In view of the above discussion, we hereby close the complaint with observation that, the Complainants are hereby directed to approach before official liquidator appointed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Company Petition No.125 and 126/2002 for further action in accordance with law. Rest of the issues does not arise for consideration.
6. In the result, we pass the following:
ORDER
The complaint is closed with observation that the Complainants are hereby directed to approach before Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Company Petition No.125 and 126/2002 for further action in accordance with law.
The copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and therefore the file be consigned to record.
(Page No.1 to 5 dictated to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 30th day of November 2010.)
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
ANNEXURE
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainants:
CW1 – Mr.N.P.Mallya
CW2 - and Mrs.Jayanthi Mallya – Complainants
Documents produced on behalf of the Complainants:
Ex C1 – Xerox Copy of CDR No.02281111.
Ex C2 – 10.6.1998: Receipt in respect of the CDR bearing No.02281111.
Ex C3 – 15.9.1998: Receipt in respect of the CDR bearing No.02283801.
Ex C4 - 11.9.1999: Receipt in respect of the CDR bearing No.02283698.
Ex C5 – Xerox copy of CDR No.01281023.
Ex C6 – 10.6.1998: Receipt in respect of the CDR bearing No.01281023.
Ex C7 – Xerox Copy of CDR No.02281111.
Ex C8 – 14.11.1999: Receipt in respect of the CDR bearing No.01283696.
Ex C9 – Xerox copy of CDR No. 02285597.
Ex C10 – 8.12.1998: Receipt in respect of the CDR bearing No.02285597.
Ex C11 – Xerox copy of CDR No.02284320.
Ex C12– 12.10.1998: Receipt in respect of the CDR bearing No.02284320.
COURT DOCUMENT S:
Doc.No.1: Unserved Postal Acknowledgment.
Doc.No.2: Unserved Postal Acknowledgment.
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Parties:
-Nil-
Documents produced on behalf of the Opposite Parties:
-Nil-
Dated:30.11.2010 PRESIDENT
