By Sri. K. Mohammed Ali, President,
Facts in brief:-
1. This is a connected case to C.C. No.310/13. The complainants in both cases are husband and wife. She had made a fixed deposit of Rs.3,15,627/- with the opposite party, as per the two Fixed Deposit Receipts. On maturity, she was demanding to refund the said amount with interest, in connection with the marriage of her daughter, but the opposite parties refused to do so, hence this complaint.
2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties by courier service and registered post; but not executed. A/D card was not returned. Again, fresh notice was issued but not served. Substituted service on Madhyamam Daily was published. The name was called and the case against opposite parties were set exparte. Exparte affidavit was filed by the complainant and documents are marked as Ext.A1 to A5.
3. The main points that arises for our consideration is as follows:-
(i) Whether the complaint is maintainable.
(ii) Whether the opposite parties are deficient in service and the Relief if any.
4. Point No.(i) & (ii):-
The para No.1 of the complaint is as follows:-
“അന്യായക്കാരി എതൃകക്ഷി സംഘത്തിലെ സ്ഥാപകാംഗവും ചെയര്മാനുമായിരുന്നു. സംഘത്തിന്റെ ആവശ്യത്തിനായും ഹരജിക്കാരന്റെ സാമ്പത്തിക പദ്ധതിയുടെ ഭാഗമായും എതൃകക്ഷി സ്ഥാപനത്തില് …...... രണ്ടു ഡപ്പോസിറ്റ കള് നടത്തിയിരുന്നതാകുന്നു.”
5. What does it mean? The complainant was one of the Founder Member of the opposite party institution. This is a Co-operative Society having Registered No.693 and the complainant was also serving as the Chairman of the opposite party ie., opposite party No.2. She is the wife Mr. Venugopal, the complaint in C.C. No.310/13. She was also having a double role. She is the complainant and she is the opposite party also. She has admitted in the affidavit also that (Para No.II) “സംഘത്തിന്റെ ആവശ്യത്തിനായും …...........................മകളുടെ വിവാഹാവശ്യതിന്നു വേണ്ടിയും എതൃകക്ഷി സംഘത്തില് രണ്ടു ഡപ്പോസിറ്റ് രശീതി പ്രകാരം ഡപ്പോസിറ്റ് ചെയ്ത 3,15,627/- രൂപയും പലിശയും................”. Even if there is a bonafide deposit, one portion is deposited for the benefit of the opposite party society and remaining portion is for her benefit. So the complainant cannot claim a refund from the opposite party and she is not consumer as contemplated in the Consumer Protection Act.
6. This Forum has noticed that her husband is the opposite party in several cases pending in this forum. Mr. Venugopal, the husband of the complainant was the Secretary of the Taluk Rural Housing Society, Perintalmanna for a number of year and he failed to refund the Fixed Deposit to so many depositors. In a number of execution petitions, arrest warrant is pending against him. Even though he is an absconding opposite party, in several cases he has filed chief affidavit in C.C. No.310/13 through his counsel and his wife has filed chief affidavit in this case. They are trying to make the Judicial Forum as a mockery and exploiting the benevolent provision of the Consumer Protection Act. In the following cases, her husband Mr. V.V. Venugopal is the opposite party. EA-35/2010, EA-55/2014, EA-54/2014 and C.C/52/2010. In C.C.52/2010, the opposite party ie., the husband of the complainant was directed by this Forum to return the original Title deeds which was deposited for availing loan and also to execute the release deed in favour of the complainant along with cost of Rs.7,000/-. In case of failure on the part of opposite party to return the title deeds to the complainant, the opposite party shall pay an addition sum of Rs.15,000/- as compensation to the complainant. This order was not complied yet by the opposite party and warrant is pending in EA-35/2010. In EA-55/2014, the complainant's husband Venugopal, has to pay Rs.50,000/-. In EA-54/2014, the amount deposited as FD is Rs.1,83,000/- as per four Fixed Deposit Receipts. The Administrator, Taluk Rural Housing Society has filed a statement in this forum, stating that Sri. V.V. Venugopal is absconding. 40 investors have applied to return the Title deeds and to F.D. Amount of Rs.70 Lakhs.
7. The complaint is only an experimental exercise to attempt to make monetary gains and so unsustainable.
8. Both Fixed d Deposit Receipts ie., Ext.A1 and A2 are fabricated documents and both are issued by complainant herself in favour of the complainant. Both bear the signature of the complainant, Shyamala. The signature in the complaint, chief affidavit and Fixed Deposit Receipt are similar and same. Over writing and alteration in red ink can be clearly understood. In the connected case C.C. No.310/13 the complainant has put her signature as Chairman of the Society.
9. It is evident from the records of the Forum that both husband and wife was cheating a lot of innocent depositors causing to dissolve of the former Society. Both of them were receiving Fixed Deposits from the customers in the name of the Taluk Rural Housing society, Perintalmanna and the same amount must have deposited in this society.
10. Section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 empower this forum to dismiss frivolous and vexatious complaint and order to pay cost to opposite party. Here, the opposite parties are unknown. No process was executed. Sometime, the complainant and her husband are still having the role of opposite parties who was having the experience to evade the process by influencing others.
11. In the result, the complaint is dismissed and the complainant is directed to remit Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) under section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as cost with this forum since the opposite parties are unknown, the amount shall be deposited in the legal aid fund of the Forum within one month of the receipt of the copy of this order.
Dated this 1st day of April, 2015.
K. MOHAMMED ALI, PRESIDENT
R. K. MADANAVALLY, MEMBER
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 and A2
Ext.A1 : F. D. Receipt dated, 22-07-2011 for Rs.50,000/-.
Ext.A2 : F. D. Receipt dated, 02-04-2013 for Rs.2,65,627/-.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil
K. MOHAMMED ALI, PRESIDENT
R. K. MADANAVALLY, MEMBER
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
