BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM<br /> VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER<br /> O.P.No. 542/2002 Filed on 26/12/2002<br /> Dated : 29.03.2008<br /> Complainant : <br /> Annamma Thomas, Chalukunnel, T.C 13/671, G.H. Road, Tvpm.<br /> (By adv. Sri. N. Binu)<br /> Opposite parties :<br /> 1.M/s Lloyds Finance Ltd. Represented by its Managing Director, 53, Thiruvenkitaswamy Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore -641002.<br /> 2.Intigrate Enterprises (India) Ltd, T.C 25/2683, Ambujavilasom Road, Opposite P.R.S. Court, Tvpm.<br /> <br /> This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 20.11.2003, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08.02.2008 and re-heard the complaint. This O.P having been heard on 14.03.2008, the Forum on 29.03.2008 delivered the following:<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER <br /> SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER<br /> The complainant's case is that she had deposited an amount of Rs. 13,000/- with the 1st opposite party through the 2nd opposite party for which a deposit receipt dated 10.03.1998 has also been issued. Since the said amount was not returned even after maturity period, the complainant contacted the opposite parties and the complainant was promised the release of the said amount in 3 instalments by the 1st opposite party. Accordingly the complainant received Rs. 3,900/- on 16.03.2000 and the balance 2 instalments have not been refunded to her in spite of her repeated demands. Hence this complaint for refund of balance amount of Rs. 11195/- with interest from the opposite parties along with compensation and costs. <br /> The opposite parties remain ex-parte. The complainant, PW1, has filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination and Exts. P1 to P7 were marked on her side. She has not been cross-examined, hence her deposition stands unchallenged. <br /> The points to be considered are :-<br /> (i)Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?<br /> (ii)Whether the complainant is eligible for the reliefs claimed in the complaint?<br /> Points (i) and (ii):- The specific case of the complainant is that, she has not been refunded the entire amount deposited by her from the opposite parties. Ext. P1 produced by the complainant is the copy of the deposit receipt in the name of the complainant. As per it , it is evident that an amount of Rs. 13000/- has been deposited by her with the 1st opposite party. Ext. P7 is the document issued by the 2nd opposite party evidencing that the 2nd opposite party had received the Fixed Deposit Receipt pertaining to Ext. P1 for refund process. As per records it is evident that the complainant had deposited Rs. 13000/- with the 1st opposite party through the 2nd opposite party. As per Ext. P4 it can be seen that the 1st opposite party has refunded the 1st instalment of Rs. 3900/- and further more they have agreed to refund the balance amount in 2 instalments. But as per Ext. P4, the 1st opposite party has rescheduled the fixed deposit repayments. But nothing on record to show that on what basis the 2nd opposite party has arrived at and rescheduled the amount mentioned in Ext. P4. No scrap of paper to corroborate the same is on record, since the opposite parties are ex-parte. In such a circumstance we are inclined to believe the complainant. Accordingly the complainant admits that she had received the 1st instalment and the balance two instalments are still due. The materials on record amply establish the case of the complainant. The opposite parties cannot escape the liability of payment of the amount with interest. The complainant has succeeded in proving her complaint and it is found that there is deficiency in service on the part of both the opposite parties. <br /> In the result, the opposite parties are directed to repay the balance amount of Rs. 11195/- with 12.5% interest from 31.03.1999 till the date of payment. The opposite parties shall also pay an amount of Rs. 2000/- towards compensation and Rs. 500/- as costs to the complainant. Time for compliance one month, failing which execution proceedings can be taken. <br /> 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.<br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 29th March 2008.<br /> <br /> G. SIVAPRASAD President<br /> <br /> BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> <br /> S.K.SREELA : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O.P.No.542/2002<br /> APPENDIX<br /> I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :<br /> <br /> PW1 - Annamma George<br /> <br /> II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :<br /> P1 - Copy of deposit receipt No. MD/CBJ/DD dated 10.03.1998.<br /> P2 - Copy of letter dated 17.05.1999 addressed to the 1st opposite party by the complainant. <br /> P3 - Copy of letter dated 10.06.2002 addressed to the 1st opposite party bythe complainant.<br /> P4 - Copy of letter dated 29.03.2000 issued by the 1st opposite party.<br /> P5 - Copy of advocate notice dtd. 12.11.2002.<br /> P6 - Copy of postal receipt and acknowledgement card.<br /> P7 - Copy of letter from 2nd opposite party to the complainant. <br /> <br /> III OPPOSITE PARTIES' WITNESS :<br /> NIL<br /> <br /> IV OPPOSITE PARTIES' DOCUMENTS :<br /> <br /> NIL<br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br />