BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PRESENT:
SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER O.P. No: 142/2005 Filed on 4/3/2005 Dated: 30..05..2009 Complainants: N. Haridas, T.C.30/132, 'Prashanthi', Kallummoodu, Near Sreedevi Temple, Anayara-P.O., Thiruvananthapuram. T. Sudha Devi, W/o N. Haridas ..do.. ..do..
(By Adv. Pramod Chandran)
Opposite party:
Sebastian Mathew, Managing Partner, Darsan Finance and Investments, T.C.9/1505, Sasthamangalam, Thiruvananthapuram.
Present address Darsan Consumer Durables (P) Ltd., A-23, Lakshmi Nagar, Kesavadasapuram, Thiruvananthapuram.
(By Adv. M.R. Anandakuttan)
This O.P having been heard on 08..05..2009, the Forum on 30..05..2009 delivered the following:
ORDER
SMT. S.K.SREELA, MEMBER:
The facts leading to the filing of the complaint are the following: The opposite party who is running a financial institution canvassed the complainants to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- in their Fixed Deposits Scheme and promised 22% interest per month which would be disbursed before 10th of every month. Lured by the above assurance and promise, the complainants had deposited Rs.3,80,000/- as FD for a period of one year in their joint names and accordingly Fixed Deposit Certificate was issued by the opposite party. The interests were disbursed as per the agreement till May 2003. From June 2003 onwards the opposite party had failed to disburse the interest as per the agreement. When the Fixed Deposit matured on 22/1/2004, the complainants approached the opposite party for releasing the amount several times but it was not refunded and on 23/12/2004, the opposite party had told the complainants that he was not prepared to give the money and threatened with dire consequences if the complainants again approached the opposite party. Hence this complaint for refund of the amount with compensation and costs.
2. The opposite party has filed version contending as follows: The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The complainant is not a consumer as envisaged under Section 2(1) of the consumer Protection Act. The Hon'ble Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain the complaint since the subject matter in dispute is with respect to money and hence the Civil Court is proper Forum to adjudicate this matter. The complaint is bad for misjoinder of the opposite party and non-joinder of necessary parties. The opposite party has never conducted a financial institution as stated in the complaint. It is true that the opposite party has been conducting a shop room at Kesavadasapuram, Thiruvananthapuram under the name and style Darshan Consumer Durables (P) Ltd., that the opposite party never approached the complainant's residence for canvassing the customers and never persuaded them to deposit their money in the bank and also there was no promise of payment of interest at 22% per month, and that the opposite party has never received any amount as deposit from the complainants and never issued a certificate as stated in the complaint. The complainants are totally strangers to the opposite party. The complainants never approached the opposite party for payment of interest and he never used to pay any interest to the complaint since he did not receive any money as deposit from the complainant. The complainants were never the consumer of the opposite party and the opposite party never done any act causing mental agony and hardships to the complainants. Hence prays for dismissal of the complaint with costs. 3. The 1st complainant has filed affidavit for and on behalf of the 2nd complainant also. The 1st complainant has been examined as PW1, and marked Ext.P1. PW1 has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged. Opposite party has not filed any affidavit and no documents were marked on the part of the opposite party.
4. The issues that would arise for consideration are:
Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? Whether the complainants are entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?
5. Points (i) & (ii) : Ext.P1 is the Fixed Deposit certificate showing the receipt of Rs.3,80,000/- from the complainants by one Darsan Finance & Investments wherein the date of deposit is 23/1/2004. The rate of interest as agreed in Ext.P1 is 22%. The complainants have alleged that lured by the assurances made by the opposite party, the complainants have deposited the above amount with the opposite party and Ext.P1 has been issued to them.
6. The opposite party has contended that they have never conducted a financial institution as stated in the complaint but the opposite party has a shop room under the name and style Darshan Consumer Durables (P) Ltd. 7. At this juncture, the aspect to be looked into is whether Ext.P1 has been issued by the opposite party in this case. We have perused the signature in Ext.P1 and the signature in the A/D card of the notice issued by the Forum to the opposite party. No expertise is required to come to the conclusion that the signature of the Managing Partner in Ext.P1 and the signature in the A/D card of the opposite party as one and the same. Moreover the opposite party has never cross examined the complainant and has not controverted Ext.P1. Opposite party has not filed any affidavit in support of their contention. Since Ext.P1 stands uncontroverted, we have no hesitation to conclude that Ext.P1 has been issued by the opposite party himself. 8. The complainants allege that they have received interest for the said amount till May 2003. The opposite party has neither paid interest after May 2003 nor refunded the matured amount. Since the deposits made by the complainants and the liability of the opposite party to refund the same has been established by the complainants the non-payment of interest and fixed deposit amount on its maturity obviously amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence the complainants are found entitled to refund of Rs.3,80,000/- from the opposite party with 22% interest from June 2003 along with a cost of Rs.1,000/-. Since interest has been ordered, there is no separate order as to compensation.
In the result the complaint is allowed and the opposite party is directed to refund Rs.3,80,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs eighty thousand only) with 22% interest from June 2003 till the date of payment to the complainants along with a cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only). A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, on this the 30th day of May, 2009.
S.K. SREELA, MEMBER.
G. SIVAPRASAD, PRESIDENT.
BEENA KUMARI.A, MEMBER. ad. O.P.No.142/2005 APPENDIX I. Complainants' witness: PW1 : Haridas. N II. Complainants' documents:
P1 : Copy of fixed deposit certificate No.163 with folio No.23 for Rs.3,80,000/-.
III. Opposite party's witness: NIL
IV. Opposite party's documents: NIL
PRESIDENT
ad.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PRESENT:
SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A : MEMBER SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER O.P. No: 142/2005 Filed on 4/3/2005 Dated: 30..05..2009 Complainants: N. Haridas, T.C.30/132, 'Prashanthi', Kallummoodu, Near Sreedevi Temple, Anayara-P.O., Thiruvananthapuram. T. Sudha Devi, W/o N. Haridas ..do.. ..do..
(By Adv. Pramod Chandran)
Opposite party:
Sebastian Mathew, Managing Partner, Darsan Finance and Investments, T.C.9/1505, Sasthamangalam, Thiruvananthapuram.
Present address Darsan Consumer Durables (P) Ltd., A-23, Lakshmi Nagar, Kesavadasapuram, Thiruvananthapuram.
(By Adv. M.R. Anandakuttan)
This O.P having been heard on 08..05..2009, the Forum on 30..05..2009 delivered the following:
ORDER
SMT. S.K.SREELA, MEMBER:
The facts leading to the filing of the complaint are the following: The opposite party who is running a financial institution canvassed the complainants to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- in their Fixed Deposits Scheme and promised 22% interest per month which would be disbursed before 10th of every month. Lured by the above assurance and promise, the complainants had deposited Rs.3,80,000/- as FD for a period of one year in their joint names and accordingly Fixed Deposit Certificate was issued by the opposite party. The interests were disbursed as per the agreement till May 2003. From June 2003 onwards the opposite party had failed to disburse the interest as per the agreement. When the Fixed Deposit matured on 22/1/2004, the complainants approached the opposite party for releasing the amount several times but it was not refunded and on 23/12/2004, the opposite party had told the complainants that he was not prepared to give the money and threatened with dire consequences if the complainants again approached the opposite party. Hence this complaint for refund of the amount with compensation and costs.
2. The opposite party has filed version contending as follows: The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The complainant is not a consumer as envisaged under Section 2(1) of the consumer Protection Act. The Hon'ble Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain the complaint since the subject matter in dispute is with respect to money and hence the Civil Court is proper Forum to adjudicate this matter. The complaint is bad for misjoinder of the opposite party and non-joinder of necessary parties. The opposite party has never conducted a financial institution as stated in the complaint. It is true that the opposite party has been conducting a shop room at Kesavadasapuram, Thiruvananthapuram under the name and style Darshan Consumer Durables (P) Ltd., that the opposite party never approached the complainant's residence for canvassing the customers and never persuaded them to deposit their money in the bank and also there was no promise of payment of interest at 22% per month, and that the opposite party has never received any amount as deposit from the complainants and never issued a certificate as stated in the complaint. The complainants are totally strangers to the opposite party. The complainants never approached the opposite party for payment of interest and he never used to pay any interest to the complaint since he did not receive any money as deposit from the complainant. The complainants were never the consumer of the opposite party and the opposite party never done any act causing mental agony and hardships to the complainants. Hence prays for dismissal of the complaint with costs. 3. The 1st complainant has filed affidavit for and on behalf of the 2nd complainant also. The 1st complainant has been examined as PW1, and marked Ext.P1. PW1 has not been cross examined and hence his affidavit stands unchallenged. Opposite party has not filed any affidavit and no documents were marked on the part of the opposite party.
4. The issues that would arise for consideration are:
Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? Whether the complainants are entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?
5. Points (i) & (ii) : Ext.P1 is the Fixed Deposit certificate showing the receipt of Rs.3,80,000/- from the complainants by one Darsan Finance & Investments wherein the date of deposit is 23/1/2004. The rate of interest as agreed in Ext.P1 is 22%. The complainants have alleged that lured by the assurances made by the opposite party, the complainants have deposited the above amount with the opposite party and Ext.P1 has been issued to them.
6. The opposite party has contended that they have never conducted a financial institution as stated in the complaint but the opposite party has a shop room under the name and style Darshan Consumer Durables (P) Ltd. 7. At this juncture, the aspect to be looked into is whether Ext.P1 has been issued by the opposite party in this case. We have perused the signature in Ext.P1 and the signature in the A/D card of the notice issued by the Forum to the opposite party. No expertise is required to come to the conclusion that the signature of the Managing Partner in Ext.P1 and the signature in the A/D card of the opposite party as one and the same. Moreover the opposite party has never cross examined the complainant and has not controverted Ext.P1. Opposite party has not filed any affidavit in support of their contention. Since Ext.P1 stands uncontroverted, we have no hesitation to conclude that Ext.P1 has been issued by the opposite party himself. 8. The complainants allege that they have received interest for the said amount till May 2003. The opposite party has neither paid interest after May 2003 nor refunded the matured amount. Since the deposits made by the complainants and the liability of the opposite party to refund the same has been established by the complainants the non-payment of interest and fixed deposit amount on its maturity obviously amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence the complainants are found entitled to refund of Rs.3,80,000/- from the opposite party with 22% interest from June 2003 along with a cost of Rs.1,000/-. Since interest has been ordered, there is no separate order as to compensation.
In the result the complaint is allowed and the opposite party is directed to refund Rs.3,80,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs eighty thousand only) with 22% interest from June 2003 till the date of payment to the complainants along with a cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only). A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, on this the 30th day of May, 2009.
S.K. SREELA, MEMBER.
G. SIVAPRASAD, PRESIDENT.
BEENA KUMARI.A, MEMBER. ad. O.P.No.142/2005 APPENDIX I. Complainants' witness: PW1 : Haridas. N II. Complainants' documents:
P1 : Copy of fixed deposit certificate No.163 with folio No.23 for Rs.3,80,000/-.
III. Opposite party's witness: NIL
IV. Opposite party's documents: NIL
PRESIDENT
......................Smt. Beena Kumari. A
......................Smt. S.K.Sreela
......................Sri G. Sivaprasad | | 
