Kerala

StateCommission

A/11/698

SAPTAMI KURIES AND LOANS - Complainant(s)

Versus

JAYAN.M.R - Opp.Party(s)

C.S.RAJMOHAN

15 Jun 2012

ORDER

Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Vazhuthacaud,Thiruvananthapuram
 
First Appeal No. A/11/698
(Arisen out of Order Dated 16/08/2011 in Case No. CC/07/709 of District Trissur)
 
1. SAPTAMI KURIES AND LOANS
VICOTY BUILDINGS,PATTAMBI ROAD,KUNNAMKULAM
TRISSUR
KERALA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. JAYAN.M.R
KOTTAPADI,P.O,PPOKKODE,CHAVAKKAD TALUK
TRISSUR
KERALA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Smt.A.RADHA PRESIDING MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

 

APPEAL NO. 698/11

JUDGMENT DATED : 15.06.2012

 

PRESENT:

 

SHRI . K. CHANDRADAS NADAR          :   JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

SMT. A. RADHA                                       :  MEMBER

 

1.      M/s Saptami Kuries & Loans,

Victory Building, Pattambi Road,

Kunnamkulam,

Rep. by Managing partner V.R. Praveen,

2.      V.R. Praveen,

Managing Partner,                           :  APPELLANTS

M/s Saptami Kuries & Loans,

S/o Raghavan, Vallikkattiri House,

Cheruvathani, Anjoor P.O.,

Thrissur.

 

(By Adv. C.S. Rajmohan)

 

Vs

 

1.      Jayan M.R., S/o Ramachandran,

          P.O. Kottapadi, Pokkode,

          Chavakkad Thaluk,

          Rep. by Power of Attorney Holder Nisha V.A.

          W/o Karosh Babu, Vattiyapurakkal House,

          Cheruvathoni P.O., Thrissur.

 

2.      Sajesh (Partner)                              :  RESPONDENTS

          Saptami Kuries & Loans,

          S/o Vasudevan, Kodathoor House,

          Anjoor P.O., Thrissur.

 

(R1 by Adv. Arshad Khan A.R.)

JUDGMENT

SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER

 

          Aggrieved by the order passed by the CDRF, Thrissur in CC No. 709/2007 the opposite parties came up in this appeal. The Forum below directed the opposite parties to return the Ext. P1 amount with interest @ 9% p.a from 25.6.05 till realization to the complainant.

         

2.      It is the case of the complainant that the complainant deposited Rs.50,000/- as fixed deposit with the 1st respondent on 25.6.07 for a period of 8 years and promised to pay interest @ 12%. The fixed deposit receipt No.40 was also issued. The respondent paid interest for 2 years and thereafter on maturity neither the principal amount nor the interest paid to the complainant. On maturity the complainant requested to return the amount which was turned down on false and untenable reasons. Hence the complaint filed.

         

3.      The opposite parties filed version contending that the receipt No.40 is a forged one. Further contention is that the receipt No.40 was related to one T.R.Sindhu who deposited Rs.20,000/- on 20.9.94 and that amount was returned on maturity on 26.09.95. The complainant settled in Gulf countries and the Power of Attorney holder filed this complaint. It is also contended that Power of Attorney was a false document and the opposite parties are not liable to pay any amount to the complainant.

         

4.      The evidence consisted of Exts. P1 to P4 and Exts. R1 and R2. No oral evidence is adduced by both parties.

         

5.      On the basis of the documents the Forum below came to a conclusion and allowed the complaint.

         

6.      When this appeal came up for hearing, the counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the receipt of fixed deposit is a concocted and forged one. The counsel also pointed out that they produced before the Lower Forum the receipt No.40 (Ext.R1) which was in the name of one T.R. Sindhu for an amount of Rs.20,000/- and it was already matured and returned to the party. It is also the submission of the counsel that the complainant was in abroad and that the Power of Attorney produced before the lower court was also a forged document. The complainant never came to India during that period when the Power of Attorney executed. The complainant is the sister of one Mr. Babu, who was one of the partners of the appellant whose service was terminated from the appellant office. The fixed deposit receipt produced by the complainant was a forged one and the embossed seal was not of the appellant.  Hence, the appellants are not liable to pay any amount to the respondent/complainant.

         

7.      The counsel for respondent submitted before us that the complainant deposited Rs.50,000/-  with the appellant on 25.6.97 for a period of 8 years and agreed to pay interest @ 12% which was not returned so far. As the respondent settled at Dubai, she executed a Power of Attorney. On maturity the amount was not returned. At that time the appellants raised the allegation that the FD receipt was a forged one which is not sustainable. Till this date, the deposited amount of Rs.50,000/- nor interest given to the complainant. The opposite parties have not proved the allegation of forgery regarding the F.D. receipt so far. In the absence of any contra evidence the complaint is to be allowed and the appellant/opposite party is liable to return the amount with interest.

 

          8.      On going through the documents and on hearing the counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the fixed deposit receipt alleged as forged one was not proved by the appellants/opposite parties. So also the signature in the Power of Attorney was also not proved as forged by the opposite parties. In the absence of any evidence to show that the fixed deposit receipt is a concocted document, we uphold the order of the Forum below allowing the complaint.

         

In the result, appeal is dismissed.

 

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Lower Forum with the LCR.

 

 

A. RADHA    :  MEMBER

 

 

 

K. CHANDRADAS NADAR  :   JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

 

 

Da

 

 

 

 
 
[ Smt.A.RADHA]
PRESIDING 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.