Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/77/2021

Smt.Kariyamma w/o late Ningappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

C.H.Thirupathaiah,Sector Head. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.S.Anjaneyalu

18 Aug 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHITRADURGA.

CC.NO:77/2021

DATED: 18^th AUGUST 2022

PRESENT:      Sri. M.I.SHIGLI. B.A., LL.M.,       PRESIDENT

 

                        Smt. B.H. YASHODA.    B.A., LL.B., LADY MEMBER

 

                    

……COMPLAINANT/S	Smt.Kariyamma W/o Late Ningappa . Aged about 65 years, Maid servant, R/o Gandhi Nagar, Chitradurga. (Rep by Advocate Sri. S.Anjaneyalu)
V/S
.….OPPOSITE PARTY/S	C.H.Thirupathaiah, Sector Head, SAHARA Credit co-operative society ltd., BD Road,Chitradurga.  (Rep by Advocate Sri  Khalidh Ahamed)

:ORDER:

 

Sri. M.I.SHIGLI. B.A., LL.M., PRESIDENT

 

       The present complaint is filed U/s 35 of CP Act 2019, praying for on order against the OP directing him to pay Rs.53,498/- with interest at rate of 24% p.a. and ancillary compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering and mental agony.

 

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

        2. The complainant is said to have R.D. A/c holder of OP
like that of her neighboring owners.  She is said to have paid regularly R.D. amount for about 2 years, which is matured. It is stated that the OP again with fraudulent assurances made her to accept, the alternative arrangement for repay her R.D. amount, converting it into Fixed Deposit and has issued F.D. certificate on 24/12/2018 for Rs.53,498/- on the date of maturity. The complainant is said to have accepted it half heartedly, and said F.D. is matured on 24/06/2020 where for the OP is liable to pay Rs.53,498/- towards maturity amount. The complainant claims to be a maid servant and this amount is important for to maintain her family. As the OP on demand and inspite of legal notice failed to pay the same, the present complaint is filed. On receipt of the complaint, this commission has ordered for issuance of notice to OP, who in turn has appeared through his counsel and submitted his written version.

        3. The OP has traversed all the contents of complaint, and has contended that the complaint is not maintainable without impleading the Registered office. He also submits that the compliant is not maintainable u/s 118 of Karnataka Co-operative Society’s Act, and complaint is time barred.

        4. After the case is being set for recording evidence, the complainant got herself examined as PW-1 and got marked documents at Ex.A-1 to A-4. Though opportunity was granted, the OP has not chosen to examine any witness nor any documents produced in his support.

        5. Written arguments of complainant filed, and on the contrary no arguments advanced for OP. Having heard, the contentions, of the complainant and versions, the following points arise for consideration, viz…

1. Whether the complainant proves that she is the consumer of complaint?
2. Whether the complainant further proves deficiency of service?
3. What Order?

 

6. The findings of this commission on the Points for consideration are as below.

Point (a): In the affirmative

Point (b): In the affirmative

Point (c): As per the final order for the following.

:REASONS:

7. The documents produced by the complainant at Ex.A-1 to A-4, are not disputed by the OP either in his written version or by evidence. Ex.A-1 is the F.D. receipt, Ex.A-2 and A-3 are the Postal Acknowledgement and Window receipt respectively Ex.A-4 is the office copy of the Legal Notice.

         Though the OP has rebutted the contentions of the complainant on technical grounds, has tacitly admitted the fact that, the complainant is the consumer of the OP. Hence, the Point (a) is answered in the affirmative.

        8. The OP during the progress of the matter has paid Rs.15,000/- by way of cheque, which implied that, the OP is due to pay the amount as per Ex.A-1. The part payment of the claim amount itself demonstrates the fact that, the complainant is entitled for payment as per Ex.A-1 However, the OP has failed to clear off the due amount on subsequent adjournment. Hence the Point (b) is to be answered in the affirmative and is answered accordingly.

        In view of the narration of above facts and circumstances we proceed to pass the following.

::ORDER::

        The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 35 of CP Act 2019 is partly allowed.

 

1. The OP shall pay the maturity amount of Rs.53,498/- subtracting Rs.15,000/- already paid on 14/07/2022.

 

2. The OP shall also pay Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering and mental agony.

 

 

3. The OP shall pay Rs.5,000/- towards costs of the proceedings.

The aggregate amount shall be paid within a period of 30 days from the date of this order, failure to which shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.m. till its realization.

Communicate the order to parties.

  

(Typed directly on the computer to the dictation given to stenographer, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced by us on 18^thAugust 2022.)

 

 

 

          LADY MEMBER                                      PRESIDENT

 

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

1. Smt.Kariyamma W/o Late Ningappa

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of Opponent:

Nil

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	F.D. receipt
02	Ex-A-2 & 3:-	Postal Acknowledgement and Window receipt
03	Ex-A-4:-	Office copy of the Legal Notice.

 

Documents marked on behalf of opponent No.1:

 

Nil

 

 

      LADY MEMBER                                         PRESIDENT

 

 

 

GM