This complaint is coming up before us for final hearing on        30-07-14 in the presence of Sri G.Punna Reddy, advocate for complainant,  1^st opposite party set exparte, Sri A.A. Prasad, Advocate for 2^nd opposite party upon perusing the material on record after hearing complainant and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

Per Sri A. Prabhakar Gupta, Member:-

            The present complainant filed this complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for recovery of deposited amount since both the opposite parties are doing financing and housing business.  For which, he claimed an amount of Rs.12,43,155/- for the due amount of the deposit and an amount of Rs.25,000/- for her mental agony and Rs.20,000/- towards costs of the complaint.

1. In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

          The present complainant is the permanent resident of Nellore town, well acquainted with the 1^st opposite party corporation and with the authorized signatory of  1^st opposite party who was labeled as 2^nd opposite party.  The 1^st opposite party is the financial corporation represented by its proprietrix Smt. Gurajala Padmaja under the name and style of Balaji Housing and Finance Corporation, Guntur.  The nature of the 1^st opposite party’s corporation is doing housing business as well as financial dealings i.e., offering deposits from the general public and payment on due date.  The 2^nd opposite party is the authorized signatory to the 1^st opposite party’s corporation.  Further, the 2^nd opposite party is the husband of 1^st opposite party’s corporation proprietrix Smt. Gurajala Padmaja.  Both are dealing with the matters concerned to the said corporation.  During the course of their business, 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties offered deposits from the general public @ interest 18% p.a., with specific terms.  On the canvas of opposite parties as well as promises and after knowing well about terms and conditions of the deposit scheme, the present complainant deposited an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- on 10-02-2013 under certificate No.257/10/2/03.  The said amount has to be calculated interest @ 18% p.a.  As per the terms and conditions the 1^st opposite party corporation issued receipt for the said deposit amount mentioning the date of maturity as  28-12-2004 and value of the maturity is Rs.5,44,000/-.  While that is so, after maturity date the present complainant made request for the return of maturity amount.  But on one pretext or other the opposite parties postponing the same without any payment.  At last and on demands the opposite parties paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- on 24-09-07 as a part payment for the due amount as on 24-09-07 and acknowledged the same.  After the payment of Rs.2,50,000/- there is an  amount of Rs.5,68,170/-  is due by the opposite parties as on 24-09-2007.  For this due amount and inspite of repeated demands the opposite parties paid part payments of Rs.2,000/- on 18-08-2009, Rs.2,000/- on 05-08-2011 and Rs.1,000/- on 16-07-2013.  Except these payment the opposite parties not paid the total due amount of the said deposit inspite of repeated demands and legal notice dt.29-11-13.  As on date of this complaint the opposite parties has to pay an amount of Rs.12,43,155/- which has to be paid with 18% future interest.  Since, the acts of the opposite parties come under the purview of deficiency of service this complainant approached this Forum and filed the present complaint for grant of relief as prayed for. 

3.      1^st opposite party remained exparte.             

4.      The averments of the version of 2^nd opposite party in brief

as follows:

          The 2^nd opposite party filed his version admitting the facts of the deposit, renewal of the said deposit for further three years and the part payments which are mentioned in the complaint.  The rest of the allegations of the complaint are denied by the 2^nd opposite party.  Mainly he contended that the present complainant is not a consumer since the relationship is creditor and debtor. As such this Forum is not having jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.  Further, he also contended that the complainant claimed excessive interest @ 18% p.a., since she is entitled for only 9% p.a.  Further, he also contended that as the opposite parties facing financial crises requested the complainant permit them to pay the due amount in installments.  Since the complainant refused to grant installments for the payment of due amount, the opposite parties failed to clear the due amount.  As such there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties, Hence he prayed to dismiss the complaint.

5.     Complainant and 2^nd opposite party filed their respective affidavits.  Ex.A-1 to A-10 marked on behalf of complainant and no documents were marked on behalf of opposite parties.  

6.  Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:

1.     Whether the complainant is a consumer?

2.     Whether the opposite parties committed deficiency of service?

3.     To what relief? 

1. POINT NO.1 & 2:- The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the present complainant deposited an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party corporation on the canvas and promises, and as per the terms and conditions of the deposit scheme, which scheme offers 18% p.a. interest.   The complainant made demands after only maturity period that is on 28-12-2014 for getting maturity value of Rs.5,44,000/-. Even inspite of demands the opposite parties failed to pay the maturity amount as agreed by them.  Since, the 2^nd opposite party is authorized signatory for the 1^st opposite party corporation who issued the present subject matter certificate and who paid the part payments and endorsed the same on the back side of the certificate, is also liable to pay the present due amount along with the 1^st opposite party corporation. Further, the nature of the 1^st opposite party corporation is doing housing business as well as financial dealings, this complaint is being maintainable before this Forum. For which, he relied on two reported authorities reported in (1). 2013(1) CPR 286 (NC) in a case Anand Prabhakar Vs.T.N.Ramachandra Setty (2). 2014(1) CPR 733 (NC) Ravi Developments Builders and Developers and others Vs. Mr.Jayanthi Bhai V.Raika and another. By all these, he prayed this For a to allow the complaint. 

8.      The learned counsel for the 2^nd opposite party argued that they never denied the fact of deposit, renewal of the same after maturity date and part payments as mentioned in the complaint.  Further, he argued that this complaint is not at all maintainable before this Forum since prayer of the present complainant is for repayment of due amount under a deposit cetiicate.  The relationship between the complainant and opposite parties is only debtor and creditor relationship.  So, he mainly argued that this Forum has not having jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.  Further, he argued that as the complainant refused to grant installments for the payment of due amount, this opposite party not paid the due amount since they are facing financial crisis.  So, there is no deficiency of services on the part of opposite parties and requested this Forum to dismiss the present complaint.

9.      With the above arguments and on the strength of documents available on record it is an admitted fact that the present complainant deposited an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- on 10-02-2003, payable by the opposite parties on 28-12-2004 with interest @ 18% i.e., the maturity value is 5,44,000/-.  Further, it is also admitted fact that the opposite parties failed to repay the deposited amount with maturity value in terms of the deposit scheme i.e., they failed to pay the amount on 28-12-2004.  Further, it is also admitted fact that the payments and renewal of the deposit marked under Exs.A-2 to A-6 were also admitted fact.  There is no dispute with regard to these facts.  Now the discussing point is whether the present complaint is being maintainable before this Forum.  On careful verification and observation of the deposit certificate which is marked as Ex.A-1 it is observed that the certificate stands in the name of present complainant and issued by the 1^st opposite party corporation.  Further, it is also observed that the said certificate has been issued by the 1^st opposite party corporation and was signed by the authorized signatory i.e., by 2^nd opposite party.  As per mentions of the said certificate it has to be presumed that the 1^st opposite party is having commercial dealings with the general public in connection with the housing and financial matters i.e., offering of the deposits from the general public and return of the same with maturity value after maturity.  So, the 1^st opposite party is doing with the financial matters that is collecting of deposits and returning of the same after maturity in terms of conditions.  So, it should be deemed that if any lapses in financial payments made on the part of the company or corporation, certainly it comes under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.  This view has been taken from a reported authority reported in 1996 (I) CPJ 43 (NC) in a case Kasi Annapurna Vs. Vemuri Bharathi. In that case their lordships held that if the financial institution committed any default of payments in connection with the deposited amount, comes under deficiency of service and the Forums are having jurisdiction to entertain the case pertaining the matters of the same nature.  Further, this view also corroborated by our apex commission reported in a III (2003) CPJ 137 (NC)in a case Mrs. Anitha Ahuja v. Banwarilal Arora wherein their lordships held that even if a partnership firm doing cotton business committed any default in payments in connection with the deposited amount it should be deficiency of service and comes under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act.  So, the complainant is entitled to approach this Forum and this Forum is having jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.

10.    Since the 2^nd opposite party is the authorized signatory of 1^st Opposite party and endorsed the part payments as well as the renewal of the deposit, both the opposite parties are liable to pay the due amount.

11.    Coming to the next allegation made by the opposite party that the complainant claimed interest @ 18% which is excessive since she is entitled for interest @ 9%.  On the face of the Ex.A-1 which is having nature of deposit certificate the opposite parties himself admitted that they will repay deposit amount with 18% p.a., after due period i.e., after maturity.  So, the rate of interest @ 18% which is a contracted rate.  Hence, the complainant is entitled for the same in terms of the contract act.  Since the opposite parties admitted all the facts as mentioned in the complaint except the jurisdiction of this Forum, this Forum came to a safe conclusion that the present complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed for.

12.    POINT NO.3:-  In the result, the complaint is allowed in part in terms as indicated below:

1.  The opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.12,43,155/- (Rupees twelve lakhs forty three thousand one hundred and fifty five only) which is balance amount as on 12-02-2014 and the same is to be paid with future interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of this complaint till realization to the complainant.

2.    The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards mental agony to the complainant.  

3.    The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (rupees two thousand only) towards cost of the complaint. 

        The above order shall be complied within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.   

Typed to my dictation by Junior Steno, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 11^th day of August, 2014.

MEMBER                                  MEMBER                                PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite parties:    

                                                                                                       PRESIDENT

NB:   The parties are required to collect the extra sets within a month after receipt of this order either personally or through their advocate as otherwise the extra sets shall be weeded out.