IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA

Monday the 31^st day of  October, 2011

Filed on 10.02.2011

Present

1. Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
2. Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
3. Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi (Member)

in

C.C.No.41/2011

between

Complainants:-                                                                 Opposite Party:-

1.   Smt.Bincy Philip                                                              The Managing Partner

         Pandyalackal Veedu                                                        DLS Jyothis  Project  

         Nangyarkulangara P.O.                                                   CRH Complex 2^nd Floor

         Chingoli Village                                                                40//8942 C – M.G. Road

         Karthikappally Taluk                                                       Eranakulam

                                                                                             (By Adv. K.T. Anishmon) 

2.   Smt.Jincy Philip                                                                          

      -do-          -do-

3.  Sri. Philipose. J., Power of Attorney Holder                     

     of the 1^st and 2^nd complainants

        -do-         -do-

                                    O R D E R

  SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER)

Smt. Bincy Philip and Smt. Jincy Philip have  filed this complaint on 10.02.2011 before the Forum through their Power of Attorney Holder Sri. Philipose.J. alleging deficiency in service on the side of the opposite party.  The allegations are as follows:  As per the personal instigation of the opposite party, they had deposited a total sum of Rs.2,51,000/- in the name of Smt.Bincy Philip and deposited a total sum of Rs.1,26,000/- in the name of Smt.Jincy Philip before the firm of the opposite party on different dates.  At the time of accepting the  amounts from them, the opposite party had issued a Beneficiary Certificate in their name and that the project offered and agreed that the amount entrusted by them will fetch a minimum of twice the entrusted amount and that the beneficiary will receive the entrusted amount and will pay back after maturity. As per offer, they are entitled to get double of amount on the expiry date.  The opposite party promised that the deposited amounts  will be returned as and when it was demanded by them.  Since there was delay to get the amount, they contacted the opposite party several times.    But the opposite party have not turned up.  Hence this complaint seeking  relief.

2. Notices were issued to the parties.  Opposite party’s counsel filed vakalath.  But the opposite party and his counsel were absent on subsequent posting dates and they have not filed any version.  Hence the opposite party was declared exparte.

3. Considering the allegations of the complainants, this Forum has raised the following issues for a fair adjudication:- 

   1) Whether the complainants are entitled to get back the entire amount with interest from   the   opposite party?

2) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite party?

3) Compensation and costs.

 4.  Issues 1 to 3:-   Complainants  have filed proof affidavit and produced documents in evidence in support of their case.  Documents – Exts.A1 to A11 are  the original Beneficiary Certificates.   The certificates show that a sum of Rs.2,51,000/- from the first complainant (Exts.A1 to A7) and a total sum of Rs.1,26,000/- from the second complainant (Exts.A8 to A11) were accepted by the opposite party.  It  shows that the date of expiry was on 23.4.2009 and 19.5.2009.  The certificates was signed by the Managing Partner.  The opposite party is acknowledged the receipt of the said amounts.  The certificates show that the details of the opposite party’s firm.    

5. We have examined the whole matters involved in this case in detail and perused the documents given by the complainants in evidence and heard the case.   

  6. On the basis of assurance given by the opposite party, the complainants had entrusted the amount of Rs.2,51,000/- in the name of the first complainant and entrusted a total sum of Rs.1,26,000/- in the name of 2^nd complainant on different dates.  At the time of accepting the amounts, the opposite party had issued Beneficiary Certificates for the said amount  to the complainants (Exts.A1 to A11).  On verification of the said certificates, it can be seen that the date of entrusting the amount, name of the beneficiary, amount entrusted, date of expiry date and pas code etc.   The Certificates  were signed by the Managing Partner of the said firm.  The certificates further shows the details of the said firm at Eranakulam.  After the maturity of the said amounts as per their assurance, the complainants requested the opposite party to return the amount.   At the time of receiving the amounts, the Project offered and agreed that the amount entrusted by the complainants will fetch a minimum of twice the entrusted amount. On verification, it can be seen that the opposite party had not returned the said amounts to the complainants  in time.  The entrusted amount comes only in the nature of deposited amount.  The opposite party is fully entitled to return back the amount with interest to the complainants and that the complainants have every right to get back the amounts with interest.  It is to be noticed that the opposite parties have not filed any version before the Forum, even  though the counsel appeared and filed  vakalath.   The whole actions of the opposite party shows their irresponsible nature, fraudulent steps, cheating nature and unfair trade practice. The opposite party cannot escape from the liability by raising unnecessary contentions to the complainants when they contacted the opposite party.   The action of the opposite party shows that their malafide intention to defeat the interest of the complainants by way of purposeful refusal to repayment of amounts with interest in time.  If the opposite party is facing any legal action from the side of the Police  regarding the working of the firm, the complainants are not at all liable for that.   The opposite party has no right to retain the amounts entrusted by the complainants without repayment.  The opposite party has purposefully evaded from the liability of repayment.  The whole action taken by the opposite party in this financial case shows their illegal attitude and arbitrary nature.    After considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the strong view that the allegations raised by the complainants against the opposite party is highly genuine.  The whole facts of this case, further shows that the grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence, cheating and unfair trade practice of the opposite party by  way of purposeful denial to repay the deposited amount to the complainants with interest in time and evaded from the assurance given by them to the complainants at the time of accepting the said amounts  by  the opposite party firm.  Since there is grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence, unfair trade practice and cheating on the side of the opposite party, they are fully liable to pay compensation and costs to the complainants.  All the issues are found in favour of the complainants.  Hence, after considering the whole facts of this case, we are of the view that the complaint is to be allowed.

In the result, for the ends of justice, we hereby direct the opposite parties to return the accepted amounts of Rs.2,51,000/- (Rupees two lakhs and fifty one  thousand only) and Rs.1,26,000/-  (Rupees one lakh and twenty six thousand only) to the  complainants 1 and 2 with 24% interest from the date of entrusting the  amounts with opposite party  till the  repayment of the entire amount, and  pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each as compensation for their  mental agony, pain, sufferings, harassment, loss, inconvenience and physical strain due to grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence, cheating and unfair trade practice of the opposite party by way of purposeful denial to repay the amount with interest to the complainants in time and evaded from the assurance given by them to the complainants at the time of accepting the amounts from them. We further ordered that the  opposite party shall pay an amount of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) to the complainants  as the costs of this proceedings.  We further ordered that the complainants are free to proceed against the assets of the opposite parties in case any default to pay the amount as per this order.  We  direct the opposite parties to pay the above said amounts to the complainants within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Complaint allowed.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31^st day of  October, 2011.

 Sd/-  Sri. K. Anirudhan

 Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah

Sd/-  Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi    

Appendix:-

Evidence of the complainant:- 

Exts.A1 to A7              -           Original Beneficiary Certificates of the first complainant

Exts.A8 to A11            -           Original Beneficiary Certificates of the second complainant                    -          

Evidence of the opposite parties: - Nil

// True Copy //

                                     By Order

                                                                                                      Senior Superintendent

To

         Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.

Typed by:- pr/- 

Compared  by:-