Present :      Sri. C.T. Sabu, President

                                                Smt. Sreeja. S., Member

                                                Sri. Ram Mohan R., Member

15^th day of December 2022

CC 453/20 filed on 18/01/2020

Complainant         :         Shihab A.T., Alangattu House,

                                      Kuruvilassery P.O., Thrissur.

                                      (By Adv. A.D. Benny, Thrissur)

Opposite Parties    :   1)  Mala Gramapanchayath Rural Non Agricultural Credit

                                      Co-operative Society Ltd., No.R. 1302,

                                      Rep. by Secretary, P.O. Kuruvilassery,

                                       Thrissur.

                                 2)  Raveendran T.P., Thattanparambil House,

                                      Vadama P.O., Thrissur – 680 732.

                                 3)  Jijeesh K.V., S/o Vijayan, Kulangaramuttath House,

                                      Vadama P.O., Thrissur – 680 732.

                                      (Ex-parte)

F I N A L  O R D E R

By Sri. Ram Mohan R, Member :

1. Complaint in brief, as averred :

          The complaint is filed under Section 35(1) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The complainant states to have made four fixed deposits, each worth Rs.2,50,000/- bearing Numbers 582, 583, 584 & 585 dtd. 19/06/17, with the 1^st opposite party society, the assured rate of interest being 18.5 % p.a.. The 2^nd & the 3^rd opposite parties are respectively the President and the Secretary of the 1^st opposite party society. The deposits as per receipt No.582 & 583 were statedly returned to the complainant in July 2019, but without the interest. The maturity value of deposits as per receipts No.584 & 585 has not so far been returned to the complainant even after its extended maturity date of 20/04/18. A lawyer notice sent to the 1^st opposite party was statedly returned with postal endorsement “abolished”. Hence the complaint. The complainant alleges deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and prays for an order directing the opposite parties to return the deposit amount along with the assured interest in respect of deposit receipts No. 584 & 585 and pay the unpaid interest of the other two deposits, apart from other reliefs of compensation and costs. 

2) NOTICE :

          Commission issued notice to all the opposite parties, The 2^nd and the 3^rd opposite parties have neither entered appearance nor filed their version before the Commission, in spite of their having received the Commission’s notice. Notice to the 1^st opposite party was returned with postal endorsement “door locked”. Newspaper publication of the notice was also effected against the 1^st opposite party, but the 1^st opposite party also failed to enter appearance or file their version before the Commission. Hence proceedings against all the opposite parties were set ex-parte.

          3) Evidence :

          The complainant produced documentary evidence that had been marked Exts. A1 to A3, apart from affidavit and notes of argument. The proceedings against the opposite parties being ex-parte, no evidence produced on their part.

          4) Deliberation of evidence and facts of the case :

          The Commission scrupulously examined the facts and evidence of the case. Ext. A1 (series) comprise 2 fixed deposit Certificates dtd.19/06/17 numbered 584 & 585, issued by the 1^st opposite party in favour of the complainant, each worth Rs.2,50,000/-. Ext. A2 is copy of the lawyer notice. Ext. A3 is the Postal envelope returned with endorsement “abolished”.

          5)  Points of deliberation :

 (i)     Whether the act of the opposite parties is tantamount to unfair trade

          practice ? Or whether there is any deficiency in service on the part

          of opposite parties ?

          (ii)     Whether the complainant is entitled to receive the refund of the

                   two deposits he made, under receipt No.584 & 585 and to receive

                   the unpaid interest in respect of other two deposits ? Also whether

                   the complainant is entitled to receive any compensation from the

                    opposite parties ? If so its quantum ?

          (iii)    Costs ?

          6) Point No.(i)

Ext. A1 series - certificates evidence the 1^st opposite party’s receipt of deposits worth Rs.5,00,000/- from the complainant assuring 18.5% interest p.a.. The 2^nd & the 3^rd opposite parties were the persons responsible for the conduct of business of the 1^st opposite party society in their capacities as the President and the Secretary respectively. The opposite parties allegedly evaded return of the maturity value of the saiddeposits to the complainant. Evidently there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Collecting deposits from people offering attractive interest rate and subsequently fleeing with the funds of the poor investors, is certainly an unfair trade practice. Section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 unequivocally reveals that the opposite parties’ activities like accepting deposits etc. fall well within the definition of “service”. The return of the Commission’s notice to the 1^st opposite party with the postal endorsement of “door locked” and their failure to contest the case despite newspaper publication of notice, further unveil the 1^st opposite party’s malafide intent to defraud and deceive the poor consumers who invested money with them.

The 2^nd and the 3^rd opposite parties have not cared to file their written version before the Commission, despite their having received the Commission’s notice. This recalcitrant and neglectful demeanour of the 2^nd and the 3^rd opposite parties unveils their blatant disregard to the process of law. The opposite parties’ conscious failure to submit their written version amounts to admission of allegations levelled against them by the complainant. The Hon’ble National Commission expressed the same view by its order dtd. 09/10/17 in RP 579/2017 [2017 (4) CPR 590]

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, we find no reason to disbelieve the alleged failure on the part of the opposite parties in returning the deposits received from the complainant under Ext. A1 series receipts, as well as in promptly paying the assured interest on the said deposits. The said act of the opposite parties constitutes deficiency in service and adoption of unfair trade practice.

          7) Point No (ii) :

As elaborated supra, point No.(i) is proved in favour of the complainant. The opposite parties are bound to return to the complainant the deposits received from him, i.e. Rs.5,00,000/- vide Ext. A1 series of certificates.

The opposite parties’ misdeeds of non - payment of assured interest and failure to return the deposits even after maturity, have certainly inflicted financial loss, mental agony and hardship on the complainant. The opposite parties have necessarily to compensate the complainant. We are of the considered view that the complainant is entitled to receive from the opposite parties a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for the financial loss, agony and hardship he underwent. The complainant hardly produced any evidence at all towards his having deposited sums under the so called receipts numbered 582 & 583. In the absence of any cogent evidence, we are not in a position to consider the complainant’s claim for interest thereon.

Thus Point No. (ii) is proved partly in favour of the complainant.

8) Point No.(iii) :

The complainant is also entitled to receive from the opposite parties, a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards cost of litigation.

          In the result, the complaint is partly allowed.

          The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to refund to the complainant the total amount of deposits received from him, under Ext. A1 (series) deposits i.e. Rs.5,00,000/-  (Rupees Five lakh only), with 9% interest p.a. from 19/06/17 till the date of realisation.

          Further, the opposite parties are jointly and severally directed also to

1. pay the complainant a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand  only) towards compensation for the financial loss, agony and hardship he underwent, and  
2. a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards costs,

both with 9% interest p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till the date of realisation. The opposite parties shall comply with all the above directions within 30 days of receipt of copy of this order.

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 15^th day of December 2022.

    Sd/-                                               Sd/-                                     Sd/- 

Sreeja S.                                   Ram Mohan R                         C. T. Sabu

Member                                          Member                                      President

                                                    Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits :

Ext. A1 (series) comprise 2 fixed deposit Certificates dtd.19/06/17 numbered

              584 & 585, issued by the 1^st opposite party in favour of the

              complainant, each worth Rs.2,50,000/-.

Ext. A2 copy of the lawyer notice.

Ext. A3 Postal envelope returned with endorsement “abolished”.

                                                                                                  Id/-                                                                                                         Member