By Sri. K. Mohammed Ali, President,
Facts in brief:-
1. The complainant's case is that he had made a fixed deposit of Rs.12,74,642/- with the opposite party, as per nine Fixed Deposit Receipts. On maturity, he was demanding to refund the said amount with interest, in connection with the marriage of his daughter, but the opposite parties refused to refund. Hence this complaint.
2. Registered Notice was issued to the opposite parties, but was not executed. Substituted service in the Madhyamam Daily was published and still opposite parties were absent. His name was called and the case against opposite parties were set exparte. Complainant submitted the exparte affidavit, the F.D. Receipts, copy of the lawyer Notice with A/D Card etc. were marked as Ext.A1 to A12.
3. The moot points that poses for our analysis is as follows:-
(i) Whether the complaint is maintainable.
(ii) Whether the opposite parties have committed any deficiency in service and if so Relief if any.
4. Point No.(i) & (ii):-
C. C. No.309/13 and C.C. No.310/13 are connected cases filed by the wife and husband. This is a very strange case. The complainant has played a double role as complainant and opposite party. The para No.1 of the complaint reads that “അന്യായക്കാരന് എതൃകക്ഷി സംഘത്തിലെ സ്ഥാപകാംഗവും ചെയര്മാനുമായിരുന്നു. സംഘത്തിന്റെ ആവശ്യത്തിനായും ഹരജിക്കാരന്റെ സാമ്പത്തിക പദ്ധതിയുടെ ഭാഗമായും എതൃകക്ഷി സ്ഥാപനത്തില്.................................................... ഒമ്പത് ഡപ്പോസിറ്റ കള് നടത്തിയിരുന്നതുമാകുന്നു.” What does it mean? He has deposited the said amount for the benefit of the Society and for the benefit of himself.
5. The Ext.A1 F.D. Receipt is signed by the complainant himself as the Chairman of the Society and issued to himself as the complainant. This Receipt is having an over writing on figure 23 in red ink. Ext.A2 is also signed by the complainant as the Chairman. Ext.A3 receipt is signed by his wife Syamala, who is the complainant in the connected case No. C.C. 309/13. Ext.A4, Ext.A6, Ext.A7, Ext.A8, Ext.A9 are signed and issued by his wife Syamala. In the Ext.A5 no signature is seen in the space given to the signature of Chairman. On a comparison of the signature in the complaint and chief affidavit in both C.C. No.309/13 and C.C. No.310/13, it can be easily be understood the fact that all the F.D. Receipts, marked in both cases, bear the signature of complainant and his wife. In the Ext.A5 the figure 12 months was in red ink but, later on, converted into blue ink.
6. It is particularly be noted that a lot of cases were pending in this Forum against the same complainant filed by depositors, who were subjected to cheating. The complainant was the Secretary of the Taluk Rural Housing Society, Perintalmanna, who received lakhs and lakhs of Rupees as F. D., but failed to refund to depositors. For eg:- C.C. No.287/2009, Smt. Latha filed a case in this forum, but it was settled. So many execution petitions were pending against the complainant Mr. Venugopal, in which this forum issued show cause Notice and arrest warrant. It was reported that he is absconding, but the same complainant has filed Chief affidavit in this case through his counsel, making the Judiciary as a mockery. He could easily evade the process using his influence.
7. In the following cases pending in this Forum Sri. V.V. Venugopal, the complainant herein is the opposite party. EA-35/2010, EA-55/2014, EA-54/2014. C.C.52/2010. In C.C.234/2013.
8. In C.C. 52/10, this Forum directed Mr. V.V. Venugopal to return the original Title deeds deposited for availing loan and also to execute release deed. A compensation of Rs.7,000/- and Rs.15,000/- was also awarded against him. Since the order was not complied. EA-35/10 was filed. He is absconding. In EA-55/14 the amount involved is Rs.50,000/-. In EA-54/14, the amount involved is Rs.1,83,000/- as per four F.D. Receipts. The Administrator, Taluk Rural Housing Society, Perintalmanna reported in the Forum that Sri. V.V. Venugopal is absconding and enquiry u/s 65 of Co-operative Societies Act is pending against him.. 40 investors have applied to return the Title deeds and F.D. amount of Rs.70 Lakhs. In C.C. No.234/13, the allegation of the complainant, therein, is that an amount of Rs.6,58,818/- was deposited. On maturity, it was not repaid with interest by Sri. V.V. Venugopal, who is the opposite party No.2
9. All the F.D. Receipts produced in this case are false, fabricated and concocted documents. As the Chairman of the opposite party Society, the complainant and his wife could easily possess blank F.D. Receipts, fill up his name and put his wives signature.
10. It is only a matter of common sense that no person who is unable to refund the F.D. Amount to the depositor and so many arrest warrant are pending against him, would deposit 12 lakhs Rupees in another Co-operative Society, in which he himself was the Chairman and founder, during the same period. Consumer Forum cannot shut our eyes towards this illegality, which is highly improbable and impossible.
11. Section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 clearly states that where a complaint instituted before the District Forum is found to be frivolous or vexatious it shall dismiss the complaint and make an order that the complainant shall pay cost to opposite party. Here, the where about of the opposite party is still unknown and the process issued was executed. On the other hand, the complainant himself was opposite party, who was playing a double role.
12. In the result, the complaint is dismissed and we order that the complainant shall deposit Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) as cost with the Forum and said amount is to be transferred to the legal aid fund of this 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 A12
Ext.A1 : F. D. Receipt dated, 17-12-2007 for Rs.1,45,661/-.
Ext.A2 : F. D. Receipt dated, 13-08-2009 for Rs.90,170/-.
Ext.A3 : F. D. Receipt dated, 30-06-2010 for Rs.1,04,500/-.
Ext.A4 : F. D. Receipt dated, 30-12-2010 for Rs.1,00,000/-.
Ext.A5 : F. D. Receipt dated, 08-03-2011 for Rs.26,583/-.
Ext.A6 : F. D. Receipt dated, 19-04-2011 for Rs.65,000/-.
Ext.A7 : F. D. Receipt dated, 10-05-2011 for Rs.15,500/-.
Ext.A8 : F. D. Receipt dated, 20-11-2010 for Rs.56,750/-.
Ext.A9 : F. D. Receipt dated, 02-04-2013 for Rs.6,70,478/-.
Ext.A10 : Lawyer Notice dated, 07-07-2013 issued by complainant's
counsel to first opposite party.
Ext.A11 : Postal Receipt dated, 09-07-2013 to First opposite party.
Ext.A12 : Acknowledgement Card dated, 12-07-2013 by first opposite party
to complainant's counsel.
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
