By Sri. P. Raveendran, Member:
Brief of the complaint is as follows:- The Complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.40,000/- and Rs.5,000/- in the name of the Complainant and Rs.5,000/- in the name of his son Baby P.J in the project of 1st and 2nd Opposite Party on 28.05.2007. The Complainant deposited this amount on the assurance given by the Opposite Party that the amount deposited by the Complainant could be doubled within 100 weeks through lottery commission. The Complainant on believing the Opposite Parties that the amount deposited with them would be doubled and as per their promise he deposited the above amount. After mature of the deposited amount the complainant demanded the Opposite Party to return the amount. At that time they vaguely answered the Complainant that the amount deposited and the increased amount cannot be repaid as there is no fund available with them at present. The above act of the Opposite Parties amount to deficiency of service hence it is prayed that the Forum may be pass an order directing the Opposite Party to pay sum of Rs.1,25,000/- and the interest at the rate of 18% from the date of expiry as per beneficiary certificate till the date of payment.
2. Opposite Parties appeared and filed their version. In the version they admitted that the Complainant had entrusted the amount to the Opposite Parties on 28.5.2007. They admitted that the total amount of Rs.50,000/- of the Complainant was entrusted with the Opposite Party for supplying government lottery tickets and magazines. The Complainant has entrusted the amount to Opposite Party's firm for availing the service rendered by the Opposite Parties firm by purchasing lottery tickets and issuing college magazines to its members who joined in the scheme. In this context out of Rs.50,000/- received from the Complainant and his Son the Opposite Party's firm purchase lottery tickets worth Rs.5,000/- and issued magazines from time to time. The Opposite Party's firm did not give assurance to pay back doubled the entrusted amount to the Complainant within 100 weeks. All the other allegation in the complaint is denied by the Opposite Parties and further submitted that the project was running very smoothly without giving any room of any complaint. The working of the Opposite party's firm was stopped by the Police and directed the Opposite parity's firm to stop the work, hence the matter occurred.
3. Considering the complaint and version the following points are to be considered.
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties?
2. Relief and cost.
4. Point No.1:- To prove the Complainant's case, Complainant is examined as PW1. Exts.A1 to A3 were marked. Ext.A1 is the photo copy of the beneficiary certificate issued by the Opposite Party to the Complainant for depositing an amount of Rs.40,000/- on 28.5.2007. Ext.A2 is the photo copy of the beneficiary certificate issued by the Opposite Party to the Complainant which shows that the Complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- on 28.5.2007. Ext.A3 is the copy of the beneficiary certificate issued by the Opposite Party which shows that an amount of Rs.5,000/- is deposited on 28.5.2007 in the name of the Babu T.J. No oral or documentary evidence is adduced by the Opposite Parties. On perusing the documentary evidence as well as the deposition of PW1 it is clear that the Complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.50,000/- in the Opposite Party's firm on 28.5.2007. But no evidence is before us to show that the amount will be doubled within 100 weeks. Any how Opposite Party is admitted that the Complainant has entrusted Rs.50,000/- with them on 28.05.2007. As per the deposition of PW1 the Complainant has received Rs.350/- for the last 4 ½ years from the Opposite Party. In Exts.A1 to A3 the expiry date is on 20.4.2009. After expiry non return of deposited amount along with offer is the deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Point No.1 is decided accordingly.
5. Point No.2:- Evidence of PW1, Exts.A1 to A3 and the admitted version of the Opposite Party, it is clear that the Complainant was deposited an amount of Rs.50,000/- with the Opposite Party on 28.5.2007 and it expired on 20.4.2009. So the Complainant is entitle to get back the deposited amount along with interest. So we find that he is entitle to get Rs.50,000/- with 12% interest from the date of deposit till the payment is made. He is also entitle to get Rs.5,000/- as compensation.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the Opposite Parties are directed to pay Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) with 12% interest from the date of deposit till payment is made. The Opposite Party is also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation. This is to be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 30th November 2010.
Date of filing:27.07.2010
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
A P P E N D I X
Witness for the Complainant:
PW1. Joseph Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Copy of Receipt No.45237.
A2. Copy of Receipt No.45238.
A3. Copy of Receipt No.45236.
Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
