By Smt. E. Ayishakutty, Member,

1. Above two cases are similar. Opposite parties and issues involved are the same. Hence they are considered together and disposed by this common order.

2. Brief facts of the case.

Complainant deposited Rs.5,000/- each in opposite party’s "Sree Ramadas Mission Universal Mangalya Fund" in the office at Manjeri on 17-9-2008. Opposite party is the Co-ordinator of this establishment. Complainant deposited the amount for the purpose of receiving interest free marriage loan. Opposite party made believe the complainant that he would get Rs.25,000/- as interest free marriage loan from this "Mangalya Fund Scheme". On 19-3-2009 complainant applied for the interest free marriage loan of Rs.25,000/- for his daughter’s marriage. On 08-4-2009 opposite party issued a cheque for Rs.25,000/- to the account of opposite party in Thanur Service Bank in the name of T.M.Shajahan, the owner of the Jwellery which the complainant had purchased gold for his daughter’s marriage. But this cheque was returned as stating "full cover not received." Complainant approached opposite party and asked to return the deposited amount of Rs.5,000/- with interest. Opposite party had admitted to return this amount within one week. But opposite party has not returned it till this day. Hence complainant filed this petition before the Forum alleging deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. Complainant prays for directing opposite party to return the deposit amount of Rs.5,000/- with 12% interest per annum and cost and compensation of Rs.10,000/-.

3. Notice served to opposite party. He is absent. Set exparte.

4. Complainant filed affidavit and documents as evidence. Ext.A1 to A4 marked on the side of complainant. Ext.A1 is the deposit receipt issued by opposite party to the complainant. Ext.A2 is the marriage invitation letter of complainant’s daughter. Ext.A3 is the cheque of Rs.25,000/- issued by opposite party in the name of one Shajahan, the owner of the Jwellery which complainant purchased gold for his daughter’s marriage. Ext.A4 is the cheque return memo from Thanur Service Bank.

5. Claim of the complainant is proved. Opposite party is liable to return the deposited amount of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant with interest.

6. In the result we allow the complaint and opposite party is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- with interest @ 10% per annum from the date of deposit till payment to each complainant. Opposite party also pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- as costs to each of the complainant for this litigation. The compliance of the order is within one month after receipt of copy of this order.

Dated this 23^rd day of January, 2010.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER

APPENDIX

C.C.No.247/09

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A4

Ext.A1 : Deposit receipt dated, 17-9-2008 for Rs.5,000/- issued by opposite party to the complainant.

Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the marriage invitation letter of complainant’s daughter.

Ext.A3 : Cheque of Rs.25,000/- issued by opposite party in the name of one Shajahan.T.M.

Ext.A4 : Cheque return memo from Thanur Service Bank.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

C.C.No.248/09

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A4

Ext.A1 : Deposit receipt dated, 17-9-2008 for Rs.5,000/- issued by opposite party to the complainant.

Ext.A2 : Marriage invitation letter of complainant’s daughter.

Ext.A3 : Cheque of Rs.25,000/- issued by opposite party in the name of one Shajahan.T.M.

Ext.A4 : Cheque return memo from Thanur Service Bank.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER