BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MANGALORE

                                                                      Dated this the 14^th  May 2010

COMPLAINT NO.92/2010

(Admitted on 12.03.2010)

PRESENT:              1. Smt. Asha Shetty, B.A. (Law) L.L.B., President                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                                                                                  2.  Sri. K. Ramachandra, Member

                                                                                  3. Smt.Lavanya M Rai, B.A. (Law)  L.L.B., Member

BETWEEN:

Sri.S.Shyam Bhat,

So. Parameshwara Bhat,

Aged about 69 years,

Anugraha, Harady,

Puttur Taluk,

Dakshina Kannada.                           …….. COMPLAINANT

(Advocate for the Complainant: Sri.Sanjay D)

          VERSUS

Chief Executive Officer,

Puttur Taluk Agricultural Produce Co operative

    Marketing Society Limited,

Koornadka P.O.  Darbe,

Puttur, Dakshina Kannada.           ……. OPPOSITE PARTY

(Opposite Party: Sri. Rajesh K.G)

                                      ***************

ORDER DELIVERED BY PRESIDENT SMT. ASHA SHETTY:

1.       The facts of the complaint in brief are as follows:

This complaint is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Party claiming certain reliefs. 

The Complainant submitted that, the Opposite Party has been running a financial institution having its head office at Puttur.  The Opposite Party has launched various deposit schemes offering attractive rates of interest on deposits.  The Complainant having been attracted by the advertisements made some fixed deposit amount with the Opposite Party.  The particulars of the deposits are as under:-

It is stated that the Opposite Party agreed to pay interest at 9% p.a. and after the maturity the Complainant approached the Opposite Party but the Opposite Party sought some time to pay the same stating that the Opposite Party is in financial difficulty and will make arrangement to repay the same.  The Complainant on humanitarian ground waited for some time but the Opposite Party failed to pay the same hence the Complainant issued a legal notice dated 13.11.2009 despite of that the Opposite Party not paid the amount hence this complaint is filed by the Complainant before this Hon'ble Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’) seeking direction from this Hon'ble Forum to the Opposite Party to pay a total sum of Rs.2,37,000/- along with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till the date of payment and also claimed Rs.30,000/- as compensation and cost of the proceedings.

2.       Version notice served to the Opposite Party by RPAD. Opposite Party appeared through their counsel but not filed any version nor led any evidence till this date.

3.       In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this case are as under:

1. Whether the Complainant proves that the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service?

2. If so, whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed?

3. What order?

4.         In support of the complaint, Sri.S.Shyam Bhat (CW1) filed affidavit reiterating what has been stated in the complaint and got marked Ex C1 to C7 as listed in the annexure.   

          We have considered the materials that were placed by the Complainant before the Hon'ble Forum and answer the points are as follows:                         

          Point No.(i): Affirmative.

          Point No.(ii) & (iii): As per the final order.    

Reasons

5.  Point No. (i) to (iii):

The Complainant filed affidavit and produced Ex C1 to C7 in order to show that the Complainant deposited the amount of Rs.2,37,000/- under the fixed deposit i.e., Ex C1 to C5 with the Opposite Party i.e., Puttur Taluk Agricultural Co-Operative Marketing Society Limited.  The same has been not disputed by the Opposite Party.  Where a party to the complaint does not appear into the witness box and states his own case on oath and does not offer himself to be cross-examined by the other side a presumption would arise that the case set up by the Complainant is correct and the Opposite Party has no case.  In view of the settled proposition, affidavit of evidence unless controverted or contradicted specifically by the party has to be acted upon.

In the given case, we find that, the Opposite Party appeared through their counsel but not bothered to contradict or controvert the affidavit of evidence as well as documents produced by the Complainant in order to disprove the same.  In the absence of the same, we hold that the Complainant inspite of depositing the amount under Ex C1 to C5 with the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party agreed to pay interest at 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till the date of maturity but failed to pay the same till this date amounts to deficiency in service.  The original deposit receipts produced by the Complainant revealed that the Opposite Party issued Ex C1 to C5 and Rs.2,37,000/- amount is deposited on 09.08.2008 and the Opposite Party failed to pay the same on the date of maturity i.e., on 22.11.2008 under the Ex C1 to C4 and in Ex C5 the maturity date is on 17.11.2008 till this date is proved.  Under such circumstances, we hold that the Opposite Party i.e., Puttur Taluk Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Society Limited is hereby directed to pay to the Complainant Rs.2,37,000/- being the deposited amount under the five deposit receipts along with interest at 9% p.a. from the respective date of deposits till the date of maturity and thereafter directed to pay interest at 12% p.a. from the respective date of maturity till the date of payment.  However, the interest as well as compensation both cannot be allowed. Interest is always inclusive of compensation.  And Rs.1,000/- awarded as cost of litigation expenses.  Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of this order.

6.       In the result, we pass the following:          

ORDER

The complaint is allowed.  Opposite Party i.e., Puttur Taluk Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Society Limited is hereby directed to pay to the Complainant a total sum of Rs.2,37,000/- (Rupees two lakh and thirty seven thousand only) being the deposited amount under the five deposit receipts along with interest at 9% p.a. from the respective date of deposits till the date of maturity and thereafter directed to pay interest at 12% p.a. from the respective date of maturity till the date of payment.  And Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) awarded as cost of litigation expenses.  Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of this order.

The F.D.R., if any, deposited by the Complainant be returned fourth with by substituting the certified.

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 6 dictated to the Stenographer typed by her, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 14^th day of May 2010.)

PRESIDENT

                                 (SMT. ASHA SHETTY)

         MEMBER                                         MEMBER

(SRI. K.RAMACHANDRA)               (SMT. LAVANYA M. RAI)

ANNEXURE

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:

CW1 – Sri.S.Shyama Bhat – Complainant.

Documents produced on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex C1 – 09.08.2008: Original of the fixed deposit receipt No.4368 for Rs.50,000/-.

Ex C2 – 09.08.2008: Original of the fixed deposit receipt No.4369 for Rs.57,000/-.

Ex C3 – 09.08.2008: Original of the fixed deposit receipt No.4370 for Rs.50,000/-.

Ex C4 – 09.08.2008: Original of the fixed deposit receipt No.4371 for Rs.50,000/-.

Ex C5 – 09.08.2008: Original of the fixed deposit receipt No.4372 for Rs.30,000/-.

Ex C6 – 13.11.2009: Lawyer’s notice sent to the Opposite Party on behalf of the Complainant.

Ex C7 -                  : Postal acknowledgement.

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:

- Nil -

Documents produced on behalf of the Opposite Party:   

- Nil -

Dated:14.05.2010                            PRESIDENT