Kerala

Trissur

CC/08/236

Ramadasan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director, Deepam Kuries and Loans Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

K.K.Aneesh Kumar

27 Apr 2009

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
Ayyanthole , Thrissur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/236

Ramadasan
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Managing Director, Deepam Kuries and Loans Pvt Ltd
Anil
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Padmini Sudheesh 2. Rajani P.S. 3. Sasidharan M.S

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Ramadasan

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Managing Director, Deepam Kuries and Loans Pvt Ltd 2. Anil

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. K.K.Aneesh Kumar

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

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.

 

 
By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:
 
            The complaint is filed to get back the amount remitted in the trimonthly kuries conducted by the respondents. The case is as follows. The complainant has joined in the trimonthly pooval kuri having Rs.2,00,000/- as sala and Rs.10,000/- as trimonthly instalment vide statement No.2. The complainant has remitted 4 instalments. When he approached to remit the 5th instalment the 2nd respondent told him that further instalment cannot be received due to some problems and the deposited amount Rs.27,400/- will be returned with interest. But the amount has not been returned as promised though the kuri has stopped. Hence a lawyer notice was issued on 15.1.2008. But there was no reply or remedy. Hence the complaint. 
 
            2. The respondents called absent and set exparte.
 
            3. The complainant filed affidavit and produced documents, which are marked as Exts. P1 to P4.
 
            4. The case of the complainant is that he has remitted Rs.27,400/- as 4 instalments in the trimonthly pooval kuri conducted by the respondents. After that he could not remit due to non-conducting of the business. It was promised to return the deposited amount with interest. Even after the termination the amount has not been returned to the complainant. Hence he is entitled to get Rs.27,400/- the amount remitted with 12% interest from 15.3.05. 
 
            5. There is no contradictory evidence.
 
            6. In the result, the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to refund Rs.27,400/- (Rupees twenty seven thousand and four hundred only) to the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 15.3.05 till realization with cost Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) within two months.
 

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 27th day of April 2009.




......................Padmini Sudheesh
......................Rajani P.S.
......................Sasidharan M.S