By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:-
Brief of the complaint:- Attracted by the advertisements through medias like television, newspaper etc... the complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- on 27.10.2005 as per Receipt No.11522. The amount were deposited and Receipt were issued at Kalpetta in the office of the Opposite Party No.1. At the time of deposit of the amount it was assured by opposite party No.1 that the amount will be doubled within a period of two years. Thereafter when the maturity time attained the complainant approached and demanded to return the amount as per promised. But opposite parties requested time to pay the amount. Then the complainant approached the opposite parties at their offices on several occasions but instead of paying amount to the complainant opposite parties always extended time by saying one or another excuses and till the date of complaint, complainant not received any amount from opposite parties. As per the promise of the opposite parties now the complainant is entitled for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and opposite parties are liable to pay the said amount. It is learned that opposite parties are evading the payments of the amount due to the complainant with the intention to cheat the complainant. The complainant had suffered inconveniences and loss on account of the deficiency of service from the part of the opposite parties. Then the complainant estimates a sum of Rs.40,000/- as compensation for loss and damages sustained by the complainant.
2. The complainant had approached the opposite parties several times for the payment of the amount due to the complainant. But the opposite parties extended the time for payment of the amount by saying lame excuses. Subsequently, on 10.12.2009, 29.07.2010, 03.02.2012, 21.11.2012 and on many other occasions also approached all opposite parties directly and by telephone for this purpose. But the opposite parties failed to repay the amount as promised to them.
3. Notices sent to opposite parties, they appeared and filed version denying all these allegations. In the version opposite parties stated that opposite party No.1's office at Kalpetta is not functioning, as it was closed down on 31.03.2010. As per the petition 8 years have passed after the cause of action. Hence this complaint is barred by limitation. Again stated that they were not received any documents or details which prove the claim of the complainant in Jyothis Project and they prays for the dismissal of the complaint as per petition is barred by limitation.
4. On considering the complaint and version the following points are to be considered.
1. Whether there any deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties?
2. Relief and cost.
5. Point No.1:- The complainant filed chief affidavit and examined as PW1. Ext.A1 document is also marked. Ext.A1 is the Receipt No.111522 of Rs.25,000/- dated 27.10.2005. Opposite parties submitted that they have no oral evidence. Heard both the counsels, on going through the affidavit of complainant and evidence we found that the amount deposited on 27.10.2005 in LIS Deepasthambham Project under the ownership of opposite parties. No maturity date mentioned in the receipt, date of joining mentioned in the Receipt is 27.10.2005. As per the complaint opposite parties offered double benefits, after the deposit complainant contacted opposite parties several times to get back the offered amount. But all those occasions opposite parties sought time for payment. Opposite parties contented that the time limit for filing the complaint is already over. But in this case after collecting huge amount from depositors opposite parties purposefully locked out their branch offices and escaped, complainant contacted the opposite parties over telephone several occasions, always they sought time for payment. At last no other option left behind them filed consumer complaint.
6. Now the opposite parties are raising unsustainable contentions like limitation to escape from the liability. The deposit receipt is the one and only proof for the deposit but in the Ext.A1 no specified time is mentioned for maturity. Now opposite parties are purposefully raising contention in limitation aspect. On going through the evidence and records we find that the complainant approached opposite parties several occasions and finally on 21.11.2012 to get back the deposited amount with offered benefits but opposite parties failed to pay the amount and again sought time. When opposite parties repeatedly refused complainant's demand, they filed this complaint to get back the deposited amount with offered benefits. So the complaint is not barred by limitation. Considering the special circumstances of LIS Deepasthambham Project the complainant is entitled to get back the deposited amount with reasonable interest and cost. The Point No.1 is found accordingly.
7. Point No.2:- The Point No.1 is found in favor of the complainant. So the complainant is entitled to get back the deposited amount with interest, cost and compensation. The Point No.2 is decided accordingly.
In the result the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to return the deposited amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of deposit till the full payment. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.10,000/ -(Rupees Ten Thousand only) as cost and compensation to the complainant. The Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the amounts and comply the order within 30 days 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 21st day of June 2014.
Date of Filing:02.08.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Fr. Babu. M. J. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Receipt No.111522. Dt:27.10.2005.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
