Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/09/170

Jayarajan Nair.K. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Devadhan lottery Services - Opp.Party(s)

08 Apr 2010

ORDER


IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
OLD S.P. OFFICE, PULIKUNNU
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/170

Jayarajan Nair.K.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

LIS, Bengacherry Complex,
LIS, Bengacherry Complex
Devadhan lottery Services
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K.T.Sidhiq 2. P.P.Shymaladevi 3. P.Ramadevi

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Jayarajan Nair.K.

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. LIS, Bengacherry Complex, 2. LIS, Bengacherry Complex 3. Devadhan lottery Services

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

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.

D.o.F: 25/7/09

D.o.O:06/4/2010

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                CC. 170/09

                        Dated this, the 06th  day of April 2010.

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                            : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                                : MEMBER

SMT.P.P.SYAMALADEVI                         : MEMBER

 

Jayarajan Nair.K

Kallur Veedu, Kovval Store,                 : Complainant

Kanhangad South, 671531.

(in person)

 

1.Devadhan Lottery Services,

  Jyothis Project, CRH Complex,

 M.G.road,Ernakulam.                            : Opposite parties

2, LIS, Bengachery Complex,

   T.B.Road, Jn. Kanhangad

(Adv.K.Sethumadhavan,Hosdurg)

 

                                                            ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ        : PRESIDENT

 

     In a nutshell the case of the complainant is that he deposited Rs.20,000/- on 22/6/07 in JYOTHIS PROJECT designed by 1st opposite party.  The promise was that Rs.40,000/- will be refunded on or before 15.5.2009.  But when he demanded money ,the opposite party told him that they are entangled in some issues and therefore he has to wait for some more time.  According to the complainant at the time of accepting the deposit he was told that the amount deposited will be doubled at the time of  time.  Hence the complaint seeking an order against opposite parties directing them to pay Rs.40, 000/- with compensation and costs.

2.   According to opposite parties, the Jyothis is a project floated with the slogan earning through lottery.  The working of the project was that any person or institution interested in getting Rs.10/- worth Govt. Lottery tickets and Rs.10/- worth magazine of contemporary importance on every week can become a member of the scheme remitting a minimum of Rs.1000/- in advance and such every unit of Rs.1000/- entrusted will be given Rs.500/- worth lottery tickets and Rs.500/- magazine.  The project envisaged that the amount entrusted by a beneficiary will fetch a minimum of twice the entrusted amount as lottery prize and any shortage thereof shall be made good by the respondent firm. First as reimbursement of the amount of unissued tickets and magazines and the balance if any as compensation.  Complainant entrusted Rs.20000/- out of which the respondent firm had supplied Rs.1400/- worth govt. lottery tickets and Rs.1400/- worth magazines to   him from time to time.  But the Jyothis project ceased functioning due to the intervention and ban of the police and if the ban is lifted they will resume business or else the complainant can withdraw his money and they are prepared to pay back the entrusted amount after deducting the cost of lottery tickets already purchased and magazines supplied on behalf of him.

3.   Complainant examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A4 marked.  On the side of opposite parties Exts.B1 to B6 marked.  Both sides heard.

 

4.   It is the case of complainant that he deposited Rs.20, 000/- with the specific assurance of opposite party that they will return Rs.40, 000/- on the date stipulated.  But opposite parties later on not fulfilled their work.  Ext.A1 is the beneficiary certificate issued by Ist opposite party to the complainant.  Ext.A1 nowhere shows any maturity date or maturity amount.  Exts.B1 to B5 are some of the correspondence between Ist opposite party and City Commissioner of Police.  Ext.B6 is the copy of the order of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WP ( C ) 24704/09 dtd17/9/09.  During enquiry, counsel for the opposite parties submitted that they are ready to refund Rs.20,000/- deposited by the complainant but the complainant insists for Rs.40,000/-.

 

   In the above circumstances, we pass the following order.

        Complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.20, 000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) to the complainant with interest @12% per annum from the date of complaint till payment along with a compensation of Rs.3000/- and cost of Rs.1500/-.  Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.  Failing which the amount of Rs.20, 000/- will carry interest @15%  from the date of deposit ie 22/6/2007.

 

MEMBER                                               MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

 

Exts:

A1- Beneficiary certificate

A2&A4-  5/5/09, 9/6/09-letters to OP

A3- reply from OP

B1 to B5- correspondence between Ist OP and City Commissioner of Police

B6- 17/9/09- copy of  High Court order  in WP© 24704/09

PW1-Jayarajan Nair- Complainant

 

MEMBER                                               MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

 

eva/

 




......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi
......................P.Ramadevi