BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM<br /> VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.<br /> PRESENT<br /> SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER<br /> O.P.No. 325/2001<br /> Dated : 16.06.2008<br /> <br /> Complainant:<br /> <br /> R. Hariharan, Ram Nivas, T.C 20/3100, Karamana, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 002.<br /> <br /> (By adv. S. Reghukumar)<br /> <br /> Opposite party:<br /> <br /> The Managing Director, Prince Plantations Private Ltd., N.P X/869, Ooralikonam, Karimancode, Pacha P.O, Palode, Thiruvananthapuram. <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 19.09.2003, 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 06.05.2008, the Forum on 16.06.2008 delivered the following:<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> SRI.G. SIVAPRASAD: PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> The case of the complainant is that opposite party is a plantation company carrying on business in teakwood plantation, accepting shares in the company in the form of units. The initial investment while taking units will be refunded on completion of 5 years from the date of purchase of the units. The complainant purchased 4 teak units from the opposite party after paying Rs. 3980/- vide cheque Nos. 017884 dated 30.06.1994 for Rs. 1990/- and 017886 dated 30.06.1994 for Rs. 1990/- of the Kerala State Co-operative Bank. The price of each teak unit is Rs. 995/-. On receipt of the above amount opposite party issued two numbers of “Prince Teak Certificates” for two units each. As per the said certificates the date of joining of the scheme is 05.07.1994 and date of maturity is 05.07.2014. Quantity of teakwood guaranteed per unit invested is 30 cubic feet of round wood. The sum assured in lieu of 30 cubic feet of teakwood is Rs. 70000/-. As per the terms of the scheme Rs. 995/- per unit will be returned on completion of 5 years from the date of joining the scheme. In this case the 5 year period ended on 05.07.1999. After completion of 6 years of joining the scheme, in response to letter No. PPL/2000 dated nil, of the opposite party, the complainant submitted two applications for refund of the initial investment in Prince Teakwood units in the prescribed form supplied by the opposite party. The said application was dated 11.08.2000. Along with the said application complainant had furnished original teak certificates and connected receipts issued by the opposite party. But till date no reply has been received from the opposite party. This amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint claiming refund of Rs. 3980/- with 18% interest per annum with effect from 05.07.1999 till the date of payment and return of all original documents including the original prince teak certificates and receipts and thereby opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 10000/- towards compensation and Rs. 5000/- towards cost of the complaint. <br /> <br /> Opposite party never appeared inspite of notice and no version filed and opposite party set exparte. <br /> <br /> The points that would arise for consideration are:-<br /> (i)Whether there has been deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party?<br /> (ii)Reliefs and costs.<br /> To support the contention in the complaint, the complainant has filed an affidavit of himself as PW1 and Exts. P1 to P10 were marked. <br /> <br /> Points (i) & (ii):- The first point requiring consideration is whether there has been deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party. Submission by the complainant is that the opposite party is a plantation company carrying on business in teakwood plantation accepting shares in the company in the form of units. It was agreed by the opposite party that the initial investments while taking units would be refunded on completion of 5 years from the date of purchasing the units. Complainant purchased 4 teak units from the opposite party on 30.06.1994. The terms and conditions of “Prince Teakwood Scheme 1993” issued by the opposite party is marked as Ext. P1. A perusal of Ext. P1 would disclose that the subscription for one teak unit is Rs. 995/-, which will be returned on completion o 5 years from the date of joining the scheme. Further one teak unit, that is, 30 cubic feet of round wood or its deemed value Rs. 70000/- is assessed after 20 years. Ext. P2 is the receipt dated 30.06.1994 issued by the opposite party. As per Ext. P2 it is seen that opposite party had received Rs. 1990/- as the purchase value of two numbers of teak units from the complainant. Ext. P3 is another receipt dated 30.06.1994 which is seen issued by the opposite party. As per Ext. P3 it is seen that opposite party had received Rs. 1990/- towards the purchase value of two number of teak units from the complainant. In Ext. P2 the reference No. is 030063(004211) while in Ext. P3 the reference No. is 030092(004212). From Ext. P2 and P3 it is evident that complainant had purchased 4 teak units from the opposite party. Ext. P4 and P5 are two 'Prince Teak Certificates' issued by the opposite party. A perusal of Exts. P4 and P5 would disclose that the application number stated therein and the reference number stated in Ext. P2 and P3 are one and the same. Name of the unit holder is Hariharan Nair. The said certificates are seen issued in observance of the terms and conditions as per Ext. P1. As per Exts. P4 and P5, the date of joining the scheme was 05.07.1994 and date of maturity of the scheme will be 05.07.2014. Main thrust of argument by the counsel appearing for the complainant is that, after completion of 6 years of joining the said scheme, in response to letter No. PPL/2000 dated Nil of the opposite party, the complainant submitted two applications for 4 units for refund of the initial investment in prince teakwood units in the prescribed form supplied by the opposite party company. Ext. P6 is the copy of the letter PPL/2000 dated Nil from the opposite party. Exts. P7 and P8 are the copy of applications for refund of Prince Teakwood Unit price. The original of Ext. P7 and P8 with relevant documents were sent to opposite party by registered post on 11.08.2000, with acknowledgment due. The postal receipts and acknowledgment cards were marked as Ext. P9 and P10. Even after the receipt of the said Exts. P7 and P8 applications for refund of Teak unit price opposite party neither issued any reply to the complainant nor took any positive action to refund the said amount. No material on record to controvert the evidence adduced by the complainant. Non-refund of the above said amount would amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. There cannot be worse deceptive practice than this. Deficiency in service and unfair trade practice is proved. Complainant is entitled to get the refund of the said amount with interest from 05.07.1999. Opposite party is bound to return the original prince teak certificates and original receipts to complainant. If opposite party commits any fault or shortcoming or deficiency is bound to compensate the consumer as to the loss or injury suffered by him.<br /> <br /> In the result, complaint is allowed. Opposite party shall pay the complainant an amount of Rs. 3980/- being the refund of initial investment with 12% interest thereon from 05.07.1999 till the date of payment. Opposite party shall return the original Prince Teak certificates Nos. 004365 and 004366 and original receipts No. 004684 dated 30.06.1994 for Rs. 1990/- and No. 004685 dated 30.06.1994 for Rs. 1990/- to the complainant. Opposite party shall further pay the complainant an amount of Rs. 2000/- towards compensation and Rs. 1000/- towards cost of the complaint. The said amounts shall be paid within two months from the date of this order. <br /> <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 /> <br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 16th June 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> G. SIVAPRASAD,<br /> President.<br /> <br /> <br /> BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> S.K. SREELA : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O.P.No. 325/2001<br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS : <br /> <br /> PW1 – R. Hariharan<br /> <br /> II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :<br /> P1 - Photocopy of terms and conditions of Prince Teak Investment scheme – 1993.<br /> P2 - Photocopy of receipt No. 004684 dated 30.06.1994 for Rs. 1990/- issued by the opposite parties.<br /> P3 - Photocopy of receipt No. 004685 dated 30.06.1994 for Rs. 1990/- issued by the opposite parties.<br /> P4 - Photocopy of “Prince Teak Certificate” No. 004365 dated 30.09.1994 issued by the opposite party to the complainant. <br /> P5 - Photocopy of “Prince Teak Certificate” No. 004366 dated 30.09.1994 issued by the opposite party to the complainant. <br /> P6 - Photocopy of Lr. No. PPL/2000 from the opposite party to the complainant.<br /> P7 - Photocopy of application for refund of Prince Teak Unit dated 11.08.2000 (application No. 030092/004211) submitted by complainant to the opposite party.<br /> P8 - Photocopy of application for refund of Prince Teak Unit dated 11.08.2000 (application No. 030092/004212) submitted by complainant to the opposite party.<br /> P9 - Photocopy of postal receipt No. RLAD C 3015 dated 12.08.2000.<br /> P10 - Photocopy of acknowledgement card showing the date of delivery 18.08.2000.<br /> <br /> III OPPOSITE PARTIES' WITNESS :<br /> <br /> NIL<br /> <br /> IV OPPOSITE PARTIES' DOCUMENTS :<br /> <br /> NIL<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT