By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:
Brief of the complaint:- Opposite parties made wide advertisements in medias to the the effect that the amount deposited in the project would be doubled and multiplied to 208% (100%+108%) including lottery commission and prizes within a few months. This is also mentioned in the Notice issued by the opposite parties. On believing this the complainant deposited Rs.28,000/- in the Lis Deepasthambham Project in their branch office at Kalpetta in the name of his minor daughter Amritha Sisma. P, and the same was acknowledged vide Receipt No.64786 dated 19.06.2007. At the time of making deposits it was specifically told to this complainant that deposits would be renewed and redeposit every 2 year unless withdrawn.
2. The complainant renewed the deposits every 2 year. Accordingly deposits stand renewed on 2009 and 2011. As on this date deposits stands renewed 2 times. No separate receipts were issued on such renewals from the branch office. The complainant had approached the Kalpetta branch office of the opposite parties many times to know about the growth of the deposits. On those occasions the Branch Manager of the opposite parties informed orally that the project is running smoothly and deposits are being grown and the deposited amount and accretions thereon at the promised rate will be repaid on demand.
3. The complainant was in need of urgent funds, he approached the branch office of the opposite parties at Kalpetta on 14.12.2011 and requested for refund of the deposits and increments thereof, he was informed that the project is being closed and put forth lame excuses for the delay causing in repaying the deposit and increments. The complainant waited in expectation of return of money. Again complainant approached opposite parties on 14.02.2012. On this day also the officers of the branch office repeated the said lame excuses. On 01.03.2012 when complainant went to the branch office, surprisingly noted that opposite parties closed down the branch office at Kalpetta and knew from local enquiries that they have shifted all records from Kalpetta branch office to their Head office at Ernakulam. The complainant was not served with any information regarding the shifting of branch office from Trident Arcade building to PK Tower, near new bus stand, Kalpetta and closing down of branch office at Kalpetta and shifting of records to Ernakulam. Immediately the complainant contacted the opposite parties in their office at Ernakulam for refund of the deposit and increments thereof over phone on 01.09.2012, but it was informed that they cannot repay the amount as requested since the project has been closed and they have no money for the same. The complainant again contacted opposite parties on 17.12.2012 as a last trial. The opposite parties did not even promise to pay back the deposit and accretions thereon any particular date.
4. Now the deposits are with the opposite parties for the last 6 years. According to the promise of the opposite parties contained in their brochure and letter dated 20.03.2007 the deposit amount might have been multiplied to 1,12,000/- by May 2013. The cause of action for the complainant arose on 19.06.2007, the date on which the deposits were made with the opposite parties, during 2009 and 2011, the years by which the respective renewals were made. On 14.12.2011, 14.02.2012, the dates on which the demands for return of money were made at Kalpetta branch and on 17.12.2012 the date on which the demand for return of money were made at Ernakulam office of the opposite parties and thereafter at Kalpetta. No separate Certificate are issued by the opposite parties to the complainant for renewal of the deposit.
5. The opposite parties are not repaying the amount even after repeated demands made, they shifted the branch office from Trident Arcade building to PK Tower Kalpetta and closed down the office without informing this depositor, complainant. Complainant alleges that this is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, hence this complaint and he also prays for an Order directing the opposite parties to return the offered amount with reasonable interest, compensation and cost of this proceedings.
6. Notices sent to opposite parties. They were not appeared before the Forum and not filed version. Hence they set Ex-parte and proceeded with the case.
7. On considering the complaint and affidavit the following points are to be considered:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2. Relief and Cost.
8. Points No.1:- To prove the complainant's case he filed proof affidavit and Ext.A1 document. Ext.A1 is the Beneficiary Certificate issued by the opposite parties to the complainant bearing No. 64786 for Rs.28,000/- dated 19.06.2007. This Beneficiary Certificate is issued by the opposite parties to the complainant. Nothing else is produced by the complainant to substantiate his case, such as lottery prize, double of the deposited amount etc.... After the completion of the period complainant approached several times, lastly on 17.12.2012 to release the promised amount but opposite parties were not ready to release the promised amount. So we finds that this is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The Point No.1 is found accordingly.
9. Point No.2:- In order to prove the case complainant produced Beneficiary Certificate. Nothing else is produced by the complainant to prove the offers in the scheme such as lottery prizes, commission, double of deposit amount etc... However the non refund of the amount is nothing but deficiency of service from the part of the opposite parties. So the complainant is entitled to get refund of deposited amount with reasonable interest and compensation.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.28,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of joining the scheme till full payment. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) only as compensation and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees TwoThousand) only as cost of this proceedings. The opposite parties are jointly and severely liable to comply this Order within one month from the date of receipt of this Order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of January 2014.
Date of Filing:04.07.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainants:
PW1. P. P. Mani. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Beneficiary Certificate No.64786 Dt:19.06.2007.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
