BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT:

SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

217,218,219,220,221,222,223,224,229 & 230/2007C.C.Nos.

Dated : 30..01..2010

The above referred cases are tried jointly vide order dated 15/01/2010 in I.A.No. 209 (a)/08 in C.C. No. 271/2007.

Complainants in C.C.No. 217/2007:

1. P.M. Meena Kumari, w/o Anil Kumar, Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, s/o Parameswaran Nair ......do........... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.218/2007:

1. G. Padmavathy Amma, D/o Gouri Amma, Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala Village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

    

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No. 219/2007:

1. Geetha Kumari, D/o P. Madhavan Nair, Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala Village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant

   (By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.220/2007:

1. P.M. Meena Kumari, D/o P. Madhavan Nair, Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, s/o Parameswaran Nair ......do........... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.221/2007:

1. G. Padmavathy Amma, D/o Gouri Amma, Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala Village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

    

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.222/2007:

1. G. Padmavathy Amma, D/o Gouri Amma, Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala Village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.223/2007:

1. G. Padmavathy Amma, D/o Gouri Amma, Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala Village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

    

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.224/2007:

1. P.M. Suni Kumari, w/o Monsy K.S., Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala Village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.229/2007:

1. P.M. Suni Kumari, w/o Monsy K.S., Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala Village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Complainants in C.C.No.230/2007:

1. P.M. Meena Kumari, w/o Anil Kumar. V.K., Vyjayanthi, Maithanam, Varkala village, Varkala – P.O. Represented by her Power of Attorney Holder, the 2^nd complainant.

2. P. Madhavan Nair, S/o Parameswaran Nair, ........do......... Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant.

(By Adv. Reneen B.R. Kumar)

Opposite parties:

1. G and G Capital Bankers, Puthenchantha, Varkala, Represented by the 2^nd opposite party.

2. Balachandran, S/o Govinda Pillai, “SARAS”, Kurakkanny, Varkala, Thiruvananthapuram.

3. Sindhu, w/o Balachandran of ..do.. ..do..

This O.Ps having been heard on 15..01..2010, the Forum on 30..01..2010 delivered the following:

COMMON ORDER

SMT. S.K.SREELA, MEMBER:

Facts of all these cases are the same but the amount deposited in each case is different. The opposite parties are also the same in all these cases. Brief facts of these cases are that, the 3^rd opposite party approached the 1^st complainants and induced them to deposit money in the 1^st opposite party institution run by the 2^nd & 3^rd opposite parties. The 2^nd & 3^rd opposite parties promised and made to believe the complainant that they have necessary license to run the business of money lending and to accept deposit of money for interest. Thus the 1^st complainant in O.P.Nos. 217,218,219,220,221,222,223,224,229 & 230/2007 had deposited Rs. 50,000/- on 6/4/2006, Rs. 50,000/- on 2/3/2005. Rs. 1,80,000/- on 7/10/2006, Rs. 60,000/- on 10/3/2005, Rs. 35,000/- on 15/11/2005, Rs. 30,000/- on 31/12/2005, Rs. 70,000/- on 21/3/2005, Rs. 60,000/- on 13/5/2005, Rs. 90,000/- on 13/5/2005 and Rs. 90,000/- on 13/5/2005 respectively. Fixed deposit receipts executed by the 2^nd opposite party were issued to the complainants on the same day itself. The complainants were getting the periodical interest till April 2007. But since April 2007, no amount were paid to the complainants. Though the complainants approached opposite parties 2 & 3 for withdrawing the deposit amount, opposite parties did not repay the amount and now the opposite parties have closed the institution and are absconding. On enquiry complainants have come to know that the opposite parties have transferred all the assets and deposits of the Institution with the malafide intention to defeat the claim of the complainants. Opposite parties 2 & 3 illegally removed all gold ornaments pledged in the 1^st opposite party institution and re-pledged them in the Muthoot Bankers. The above acts of the opposite parties amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Hence this complaint for refund of the deposit amount with 20% interest from April 2007 along with compensation and costs.

2. Inspite of paper publication opposite parties never turned up to contest the case or deny the allegations levelled against them. Hence opposite parties were set ex-parte.

3. Following issues arise for consideration:

1. Whether there is any unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any compensation?

3. Such other reliefs?

2^nd complainant in all these cases is the same and he has filed affidavits in all the cases and Exts. P1 to P10 were marked.

4. Points (i) to (iii): The fixed deposit receipts produced in each case reveal the deposit of respective amounts mentioned in the complaints. Complainants have pleaded that, they have received interest till April 2007. 2^nd complainant has further sworn that though they have approached the opposite parties for withdrawing the deposit amount, opposite parties denied the same and the institution has been closed. Complainants allege that the opposite parties have illegally re-pledged in Muthoot Bankers the gold ornaments pledged in the 1^st opposite party's institution by the creditors. It is a well settled position that when a firm or company invited deposits promising attractive rates of interest, it amounted to rendering service and depositors are consumers within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act. 2^nd complainant has filed affidavits in support of the claims. Affidavits by way of evidence were filed by the complainants and arguments were heard. We have perused the documents on record and the un-rebutted evidence by way of affidavits filed by the complainants. Complainants have stated all the facts in the affidavits which have not been rebutted. From the deposit receipts we can find the rate of interest offered as 20% and the due dates of maturity are also mentioned. The act of the opposite parties in denying the interest and non-refund of fixed deposits amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Opposite parties have not challenged any allegation levelled against them. Moreover the 2^nd complainant has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged.

5. In the above circumstance, the complaints are allowed and the complainants are found entitled for refund of the amount with 20% interest as agreed by opposite parties. There is no separate order as to compensation, since we have already ordered interest @ 20% till realisation. Hence the opposite parties are directed to pay as follows:

In C.C.No. 217/2007, as per Ext. P1, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 50,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 218/2007, as per Ext. P2, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 50,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs.1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 219/2007, as per Ext. P3, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 1,80,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 220/2007, as per Ext. P4, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 60,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 221/2007, as per Ext. P5, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 35,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 222/2007, as per Ext. P6, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 30,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 223/2007, as per Ext. P7, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 70,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 224/2007, as per Ext. P8, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 60,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 229/2007, as per Ext. P9, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 90,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

In C.C.No. 230/2007, as per Ext. P10, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 90,000/- with 20% interest from April 2007 till realisation along with a cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the 1^st complainant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the order.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, on this the 30^th day of January, 2010.

S.K. SREELA, MEMBER.

G. SIVAPRASAD,

PRESIDENT.

BEENA KUMARI.A, ad. MEMBER.

APPENDIX

C.C.No. 217/2007

I. Complainant's witness : NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P1 : Photocopy of fixed deposit receipt dated 6/4/2006

C.C.No. 218/2007

1. Complainant's witness: NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P2 : Photocopy of fixed deposit receipt dated 02/03/2005

CC.No. 219/2007

1. Complainant's witness : NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P3 : " " 07/10/2006

C.C.No. 220/2007

1. Complainant's witness : NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P4 : " " 10/03/2005

C.C.No. 221/2007

1. Complainant's witness : NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P5 : " " 15/11/2005

C.C.No. 222/2007:

I. Complainant's witness : NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P6 : Photocopy of fixed deposit receipt dated 31/12/2000

C.C.No.223/2007

I. Complainant's witness: NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P7 : " " 21/03/2005

C.C.No.224/2007

I. Complainant's witness: NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P8 : " " 13/05/2005

C.C.No.229/2007

I. Complainant's witness: NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P9 : " " 13/05/2005

C.C.No.230/2007

I. Complainant's witness: NIL

II. Complainant's documents:

P10 : " " 13/05/2005

PRESIDENT.