Kerala

Wayanad

CC/200/2011

N.M.Sebastian - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager - Opp.Party(s)

24 Feb 2012

ORDER

 
CC NO. 200 Of 2011
 
1. N.M.Sebastian
Neernanickal House,Marakkadavu Post,Pulpally.
Wayanad
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Branch Manager
Lis Deepasthambham Project,P.K.Tower,Kalpetta.
Wayanad
Kerala
2. P.V.Chacko
Managing partner,Lis Deepasthambham Project,Palakkal Court,Eranakulam.
Eranakulam.
Kerala
3. Joy John
Managing Partner,Jyothis Project,Palakkal Court ,Eranakulam.
Eranakulam.
Kerala.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE MRS. SAJI MATHEW Member
 HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

O R D E R


 

By Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:


 

The gist of the case is as follows:- The Complainant had deposited a total amount of Rs.49,000/- with the Opposite Parties on different dates by three receipts. He invested the money believing the advertisements made by the Opposite Parties assuring that the investments would double within a period of two years.


 

2. After two years the Complainant demanded for the return of the money. But the Opposite Parties evaded payment. Till this date, they have not returned the money. This is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Hence the Complainant prays for an order directing the Opposite Parties to pay Rs.1,98,000/- and a compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the Complainant.


 

3. The Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A3. The Opposite Party has not appeared before the Forum. Hence case was decided exparte.


 

4. The matters to be considered are:

          1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the Opposite Parties?

          2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for any relief?

 

5. Point No.1:- Exts.A1 to A3 show that the Complainant had invested Rs.49,500/- with the Opposite Parties, there is no evidence show that the amount was repaid. Hence the case of the Complainant is taken as true and point No.1 is found against the Opposite Parties.


 

6. Point No.2:- There is no evidence to show that the Opposite Parties have given any specific assurance to double the deposit within two years. However, the Complainant is entitled to get the deposited amount with reasonable interest.


 

Hence the complaint is partly allowed and the Opposite parties are directed to give the Complainant an amount of Rs.49,500/- (Rupees Forty Nine thousand and Five hundred only) with an interest at rate of 9% per annum from the date of deposit till payment. The Opposite Parties are also directed to give the Complainant an amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as compensation and cost of the case. This order is to be complied within 30 days of the receipt of this order.


 

Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 24th February 2012.

Date of filing: 08.11.2011

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-
 

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

 


 

A P P E N X I X


 

Witness for the Complainant:


 

Nil.


 

Witness for the Opposite Party:


 

Nil.


 

Exhibits for the Complainant:


 

A1. Copy of Receipt No.91825.

A2. Copy of Receipt No.126107.

A3. Copy of Beneficiary Certificate.


 

Exhibit for the Opposite Party:


 

Nil.


 


 

 
 
[HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONORABLE MRS. SAJI MATHEW]
Member
 
[HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.