DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2023
Filed on: 05/09/2018
PRESENT
Shri.D.B.Binu President
Shri.V.Ramachandran Member
Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N Member
C.C. No. 369/2018
Between
COMPLAINANT
P. Govindankutty, S/o. P. Govindamenon, ANRA 44, Sivaparvathi, Near Makaliyam Temple, Irumpanam P.O., Tripunithura 682309.
(Rep. by Adv. T.J. Lakhmanan, Mega Arcade, Power House Road, Cochin-18)
VS
OPPOSITE PARTY
1. Kerala Housing Finance Ltd., 4th Floor, Jose Anex, MG Road, Ernakujlam 682036. Rep. by its Branch Manager Gopalakrishnan.
2. Kerala Finance Ltd., Head Office, 2nd Floor, PAN African Plaza, MG Road, Trivandrum 695001. Rep. by its General Manager Krishnan Nair.
F I N A L O R D E R
D.B.Binu, President.
1) A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:
The complaint was filed under Section 12 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts, as averred in the complaint, are that the complainant is a senior citizen and having financial and health condition and he suffered hardship due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant was allotted 300 bonds @ Rs.1000/- each amounting to Rs.3,00,000/- on 04.03.2015 @ 14% interest per annum. In the said certificate the total no of bonds held and its maturity value and maturity date are clearly mentioned. The maturity date of the said bond was on 04.06.2018 and the maturity value was Rs.3,00,000/-. The complainant deposited Rs.3,00,000/- with the 1st opposite party on 04.03.2015 and after acknowledging the said amount the opposite party issued the Receipt No:6755 dated 04.03. 2015.As agreed by the opposite parties the rate of interest was 14% per annum for the deposit amount of Rs.3,00,000/- and the opposite parties paid Rs.3,500/- per month towards interest. Up to February 2018 the opposite parties paid the monthly interest of Rs.3.500/- and thereafter they are not paying any amount to the complainant. As reflected by the bond certificate the date of maturity was on 04.06.2018 and even after the maturity date the opposite parties are not ready to pay the maturity amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant. Even though the maturity date was on 04.06.2018, the opposite parties stopped the monthly payment of Rs.3,500/- (towards interest) from March 2018. Till this date the complainant is entitled to get Rs.3,00,000/- along with monthly interest amount of Rs.3,500/- from March 2018 from the opposite parties. The opposite parties are not paid the maturity value and the monthly interest even after the maturity date, the complainant on 25.06.2018 sent a registered letter to the 2nd opposite party, even after acknowledging the same there was no positive action from the side of opposite parties. The deposit of the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- and the rate of interest @14% per annum is clearly admitted by the opposite parties in their bond certificate but even after the maturity date the opposite parties are not ready to disburse the maturity amount and the defaulted monthly interest. The said action of the opposite parties clearly amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on their part. The complainant has suffered great hardship and mental agony due to the action of the opposite parties and he is entitled to get compensation for the same from the opposite parties.
The complainant had approached the Commission seeking an order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs. Rs.3,00,000/-, Rs.24,500/- being the monthly interest from March 2018 to September 2018, Rs. 50,000/- towards compensation and the cost of the proceedings.
2). Notice
Notice was issued from the Commission to the first opposite party. The notice returned with the postal endorsement “unclaimed”. Hence, the first opposite party set ex-parte. The Commission’s Notice sent to the second opposite party was returned with the postal endorsement “Left”. The notice was also served through newspaper publication which also makes no result. The second opposite party did not file their version. Hence, the second opposite party was set ex-parte.
3). Evidence
The complainant had filed a Proof affidavit and 4 documents that were marked as Exhibits-A-1- to A-4.
Exhibit A-1: True Copy of bond certificate dated 04.03.2015 issued by the opposite.
Exhibit A-2: True Copy of Receipt no:6755 dated 04.03.2015 issued by the opposite.
Exhibit A-3: True Copy of letter dated 25.06.2018 issued by the complainant to the Second opposite party with postal receipt.
Exhibit A-4: True Copy of letter dated 05.07.2018 sent by the complainant to the 1st Opposite party.
4) The main points to be analysed in this case are as follows:
i) Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?
ii) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party to the complainant?
iii) If so, whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief from the side of the opposite party?
iv) Costs of the proceedings if any?
5) The issues mentioned above are considered together and are answered as follows:
In the present case in hand, the complaint was filed under section 12 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. The brief facts, as averred in the complaint, are that the opposite parties are not paid the maturity value and the monthly interest even after the maturity date, the complainant on 25.06.2018 sent a registered letter to the 2nd opposite party, even after acknowledging the same there was no positive action from the side of opposite parties. (Exhibit A-3). The complainant again on 06.07.2018 delivered another letter to the 1st opposite party and requested them to consider his grievance, but even after acknowledging the same there was no favourable action from the side of the opposite parties to resolve the issue (Exhibit A-4). The complainant is entitled to get Rs.3,00,000/- along with monthly interest amount of Rs.3,500/- from March 2018 from the opposite parties. The aggrieved complainant is filing this complaint for appropriate relief.
The counsel for the complainant submitted that the even though notice was issued to the opposite parties from this Commission, they have not appeared and accordingly the opposite parties have been set ex-parte. It is further submitted that in the absence of any rival contentions rebutting the claims of the complainant by the opposite parties, it is to be understood that the opposite parties are admitting the claims of the complainant.
As per Section 2 (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, a consumer is a person who buys any goods or hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment. The complainant produced Copy of bond certificate dated 04.03.2015 issued by the opposite (Exhibit A-1) and copy of Receipt No: 6755 dated 04.03.2015 issued by the opposite (Exhibit A-2). Hence, the complainant is a consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Point No. i) goes against the opposite parties.
The counsel for the complainant further submitted that the complainant again on 06.07.2018 delivered another letter to the 1st opposite party and requested them to consider his grievance, but even after acknowledging the same there was no favourable action from the side of the opposite parties to resolve the issue.
We have also noticed that a notice was issued from the Commission to the opposite parties but did not file their version. Hence the opposite parties set ex-parte. The complainant had filed a Proof affidavit and 4 documents that were marked as Exhibits-A-1- to A-4. All in support of his case. But the opposite party did not make any attempt to set aside the ex- prate order passed against it.
The opposite party’s conscious failure to file their written version in spite of their having received the Commission’s notice to that effect amounts to an admission of the allegations levelled against them. The Hon’ble NC held a similar stance in its order cited 2017(4) CPR page 590 (NC).
The opposite parties have inadequately performed the service as contracted with the complainant and hence there is a deficiency in service, negligence, and failure on the part of the opposite parties in failing to provide the Complainant desired service which in turn has caused mental agony and hardship, and financial loss, to the Complainant.
We find the issue Nos. (II), (III) and (IV) are found in favour of the complainant for the serious deficiency in service that happened on the side of the opposite parties. Naturally, the complainant had suffered a lot of inconvenience, mental agony, hardships, financial loss, etc. due to the negligence on the part of the opposite parties.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant.
Hence the prayer is partly allowed as follows:
I. The opposite parties shall pay Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) being the maturity amount to the complainant.
II. The opposite parties shall pay Rs.24,500/- (Rupees twenty four thousand five hundred only) being the monthly interest from March 2018 to September 2018 to the complainant.
III. The opposite parties shall pay the complainant Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation for loss caused to the complainants due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practices of the opposite parties.
IV. The opposite parties shall also pay the complainant Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards the cost of the proceedings.
The opposite parties shall be jointly and severally liable for the above-mentioned directions which shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties within 30 days from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. Failing which the amount ordered vide (i) above shall attract interest @7.5% from the date of receipt of a copy of this order till the date of realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant Smt. K.P. Liji transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission dated this the 30th day of January, 2023.
Sd/-
D.B.Binu, President
Sd/-
V.Ramachandran, Member
Sd/-
Sreevidhia.T.N, Member
Forwarded/by Order
Assistant Registrar.
APPENDIX
COMPLAINANT’S EVIDENCE
Exhibit A-1: True Copy of bond certificate dated 04.03.2015 issued by the opposite.
Exhibit A-2: True Copy of Receipt no:6755 dated 04.03.2015 issued by the opposite.
Exhibit A-3: True Copy of letter dated 25.06.2018 issued by the complainant to the Second opposite party with postal receipt.
Exhibit A-4: True Copy of letter dated 05.07.2018 sent by the complainant to the 1st Opposite party.
OPPOSITE PARTIES’ EVIDENCE
Nil
Despatch date:
By hand: By post
kp/
CC No. 369/2018
Order Date: 30/01/2023
