CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM.
Present
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President
Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Member
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member
CC No 36/12
saturday the 28th day of April, 2012
Petitioner : Bindhu Lakshman,
Vykundam,Near Perikkapalam,
U.C.College PO,
East Kodungalloor,
Aluva, Ernakulam-683102
(Adv.Thomas Kurian K)
Vs.
Opposite party : Lis Educational and Charitable Trust,
Palackal Court, Near Shenoy’s
M.G.Road Cochin-35 Rep.by
Chairman P.V. Chacko.
2) Kurichan Chacko,
Managing Partner,
M/s. DLS Jyothis Project,
Bharathi Building, MG Road,
Ernakulam.
ORDER
Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Member
The complainant’s case is as follows.
The complainant deposited Rs. 20,000/- with opposite parties in their “Deepasthambham Project” on 7-06-07( user name Vyku 000507040) The complainant has also deposited Rs.6,000/- in the name of her daughter Bhagyalakshmi.K.N (user name-Vykyu 000509040) and Rs. 12,000/- in the name of her son Vishnu Lalkshman(User name-Vyku 000509040). The opposite parties induced the complainant to deposit the said amount with them, made her believe that the said deposit will be returned by them on demand with the benefits and interest as assured, offered, published and advertised. The opposite parties purposefully and maliciously evaded from repayment of the said amount. On many occasions, the petitioner contacted the opposite parties and requested to settle the matter but they protracted the matter seeking more time. The complainant alleged that the act of opposite parties are in violation of law and their promise and assurances and same amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service and that the complainant had suffered financial loss, lot of hardship, strain and suffering. Hence the complainant filed this complaint claiming Rs.38,000/- @ 12% interest per annum along with compensation and litigation cost.
Notice was served to the opposite party. But the opposite parties chose not to contest by not filing their version. Hence the opposite parties were set expartee.
Points for consideration are:
i) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties?
ii) Reliefs and costs?
Evidence consists of affidavit filed by the complainant and Exts.A1 to A3
Point No.1
The complainant averred that he deposited Rs. 20,000/- vide user name Vyku 000507040 on 7/6/07, Rs.6000/- vide user name Vyku 000508040 & Rs.12,000/- vide user name Vyku-000509040 with the opposite parties in their “Deepasthambham Project”. Evidencing the above mentioned deposits the complainant filed copies of the receipts for Rs.20,000/-, Rs.12,000/-, Rs.6000/- and they are marked As Ext.A1 to A3 respectively. The complainant further averred that the opposite parties purposefully and maliciously evaded from repayment of the amount. The petitioner next averred that the opposite parties have dishonestly misappropriated the said amount for their unlawful gain. As the opposite parties chose not to contest, the allegations of the complainant against the opposite parties remain unchallenged. From the evidence placed on record we find the opposite parties deficient in service. Point no.1 is found accordingly.
Point No.2
In view of the findings in point no.1, the complaint is to be allowed.
The complaint is ordered as follows.
The opposite parties will pay Rs.38, 000/- with interest @ 12% per annum from 07/05/2007 till realization along with compensation Rs.1500/- and litigation cost Rs.1000/-
This order will be complied with within one month of receipt of the order.
Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Member Sd/-
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Documents of petitioner
Ext.A1-Copy of receipt dtd 7/6/07 for Rs.20,000/-
Ext.A2-Copy of receipt dtd 7/6/07 for Rs.6,000/-
Ext.A3-Copy of receipt dtd 7/6/07 for Rs.12,000/-
Documents of opposite party
Nil
By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
