Kerala

Alappuzha

CC/61/2007

Baban Joseph - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager, Integrated Finance - Opp.Party(s)

P.V.Satheesh

30 May 2008

ORDER


Alappuzha
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ,BAZAR P.O
consumer case(CC) No. CC/61/2007

Baban Joseph
Mariyamma Boban
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Manager, Integrated Finance
Branch Manager, Integrated Finance Company
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. JIMMY KORAH 2. K.Anirudhan 3. Smt;Shajitha Beevi

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

SMT. N. SHAJITHA BEEVI (MEMBER) The complainants Sri. Boban and Mariayamma Boban have filed the complaint before this Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The contentions of the complainants is that the complainants purchased 300 fully paid 9% redeemable secured bonds of 1000/- on 28.9.04 from the 1st opposite party and on receipt of the above amount of Rs.3,00,000/- . First opposite party is served bond certificates 3 Nos. of 100 Nos. each redeemable after 36 months and offered to pay the interest every month. Up to May 2005, the complainants received Rs.2,250/- per month as interest and thereafter the payment is defaulted till the date and even after repeated requests and contacts, the opposite parties are reluctant to keep their promise. Hence the petition filed. 2. Notice were issued to the opposite parties. Then the opposite parties appeared and filed version. The case of the opposite party is that, they deny all the averments in the complaint. The alleged bonds will premature only on 28.9.2007 and hence this complaint which is a premature one and is not maintainable. 3. The point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties? 4. Complainants filed proof affidavit and filed supporting document. Documents are marked Exts.A1 to A5. Complainant was not cross examined by the opposite parties. The opposite parties have no dispute regarding the allegation taken by the complainants. We perused the pleadings and evidence. The case of the complainants more probable than the case of the opposite parties. We are of the view that the opposite parties have not returned the deposited amount and the interest and committed deficiency in service. So the complaint is to be allowed. 5. In the result, we direct the opposite parties to repay the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) and arrears of interest till date, Rs.51,750/- together with the interest as stipulated in the bonds we further direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainants for their mental agony and inconvenience, together with a cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the complainants. The opposite parties shall pay the said amounts to the complainants within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Complaint allowed. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of May, 2008. Sd/- SMT. N. SHAJITHA BEEVI: Sd/- SRI. JIMMY KORAH : Sd/- SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN : APPENDIX:- Evidence of the complainant:- Ext.A1 to A3 - Bond Certificate (3 Nos.) Ext.A4 - Photo copy of the pass book Ext.A5 - Copy of the Advocate Notice dtd. 22.12.206 Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Oppo. Parties/S.F. Typed by:-pr/- Compared by:-




......................JIMMY KORAH
......................K.Anirudhan
......................Smt;Shajitha Beevi