This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act against the Respondents- (1) M/s. VINIV-INC (Venus-v), by its Managing Director Mr. Srinivas Shastry Bangalore and (2) VINIV-INC branch Office Raichur by its Agent and Authorised Signatory Mr. Yadunath Kolar. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> 2. The complainant Madhusudhan Kamnoor has invested a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with Respondent No-1/firm through Respondent NO-2 by way of three DDs on different dates. The Respondents have given Receipt-Cum-Investment Certificates to the complainant for the said deposited amount viz., Rs. 25,000/- dt. 03-12-03 and for Rs. 1,25,000/- dt. 11-04-05 and agreed to pay interest thereon as shown in the Investment Certificates.<br /> On 11-07-05 the complainant gave withdrawal requisition along with copies of Receipt-Cum-Investment Certificates to Respondent No-2 and requested him to close the account and pay back/refund his entire deposited/ invested amount together with up to date interest thereon as he was in need of money for family necessities but there was no suitable response from the Respondents. Subsequently he again sent requisition for withdrawal of his deposit to both the Respondents for 2nd time on 10-04-06 by Registered Post Acknowledgement Due. The said RPAD Envelops returned back with postal endorsement that the “Party has left from the address’ and ‘always door locked’ respectively. In the meantime the complainant came to know that the Respondents have duped the public/depositors and thus caused loss to him.<br /> The Respondents are bound to repay the deposited amount on demands together with up to date of interest as agreed upon. The act and attitude of the Respondents amount to deficiency of service. The complainant waited for a considerable time with a profound hope that the Respondents would repay his deposited amount with up to date of interest but all in vain. Finally on 22-04-06 he got issued legal notice through Advocate by RPAD & U.C.P. to both the Respondents. The same returned un-served with the same endorsement. Thereafter complainant got issued a final legal notice with other investors/depositors to both the Respondents by paper citation duly published in F £ÀªÀÄä PÀ£ÀßqÀ £ÁqÀÄ Kannada daily paper dt. 06-05-06. Despite the service of the said notice by UCP and paper publication of citations both Respondents have failed to repay the deposited sum with interest. The failure of Respondents in not making payment of such deposit is a case of grave deficiency of service by the Respondents.<br /> <br /> The complainant has been suffering both mentally and physically as the Respondents have failed to repay his legitimate claim and he has been put to great loss due to the acts of the Respondents. Hence for all these reasons he has prayed for a direction to the Respondents to refund/pay back his deposited/invested amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization and further direction to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for mental tension, torture & harassment etc., with cost of litigation.<br /> <br /> 3. In-response to service of notice to Respondent NO-1 sent by RPAD to his present address as UTP.No. 3666 Central Prison Parapanna Agrahara Bangalore, there was no representation by Respondent NO-1 either through his authorized agent or lawyer. So Respondent NO-1 has been placed Ex-parte. Similarly the notice issued to Respondent No.2 by RPAD to his residential address Vasavi-Nagar Raichur, returned as “Refused” as per postal endorsement so the service against Respondent NO-2 was held sufficient. This Respondent NO-2 remained absent when called out and so this Respondent No-2 also has been placed Ex-parte.<br /> <br /> 4. During the course of enquiry the complainant has filed his sworn affidavit by way of evidence and has got marked (8) documents at Ex.P-1 to P-8. The Respondents 1 & 2 are Ex-parte. Heard the arguments of the counsel for complainant and perused the records. The following points arise for consideration and determination:-<br /> 1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency in service by both the Respondents in not making payment of his invested/deposited amount together with agreed rate of interest in-spite of his repeated demands, as alleged?<br /> <br /> 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for?<br /> <br /> 5. Our finding on the above points are as under:-<br /> <br /> 1. In the affirmative.<br /> <br /> 2. As per final order for the following <br /> <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> POINT NO.1:-<br /> <br /> 6. It is the case of the complainant that he has invested/deposited a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with Respondents Firm by way of DD on different dates for which the Respondents have given Receipts-Cum-Certificates agreeing to repay the same with agreed rate of interest thereon as mentioned in the respective Investment Certificates. It is also his case that on 11-07-05 he gave a withdrawal requisition to the 2nd Respondent along with copies of Receipt-cum-Investment Certificates requesting to close his account and to pay back/refund his entire deposited amount together with up to date agreed interest thereon. But the Respondents failed to repay the same. So he again sent withdrawal requisition to both the Respondents for 2nd time by RPAD which were returned un-served with Postal endorsement that the “party has left the address” and “always door-locked”. In the meantime the complainant came to know that the Respondents have duped the people/depositors. After waiting considerable time with a profound hope, finally on 22-04-06 he got issued a legal notice through his Advocate by RPAD and UCP to both the Respondents the same returned un-served with same postal endorsement. Thereafter he got issued final legal notice along with other investors/depositors by paper citation duly published in F £ÀªÀÄä PÀ£ÀßqÀ £ÁqÀÄ daily paper dt 06-05-06. In-spite legal notice sent by RPAD, Under Certificate of Postings and in spite of paper publication of citation of legal notice, the Respondents have failed to repay the deposited amount to the complainant together with up to date interest agreed. The Respondents are bound to repay the deposited amount on demands made by him together with up to date of interest as agreed. The failure of the Respondents in not making repayment of deposited amount with interest amounts deficiency of service by Respondents due to which he suffered both mentally and physically and put to great loss on account economic crisis in the family.<br /> <br /> 7. The complainant has filed two original Receipts-cum-Investments-Certificates dt. 03-12-03 for Rs. 25,000/- & 11-04-05 for Rs. 1,25,000/- and they are at Ex.P-1 & P-2. He has also produced Notarized copy of P.F.No. (Property Form) 165/05 dt. 09-11-05 submitted by CPI East Circle Raichur interalia showing the seizure of 78 Original Receipts-cum-Investment Certificates including original Receipt of the present complainant Madhusudhan Kamnoor bearing No. 1800 dt. 16-05-05 for Rs. 50,000/- vide DD.No. 168198 as detailed in Sl.No-2 of Para 14 of the said P.F.No.165/05. This P.F. also shows seizure of all the articles (including original Receipt of this complainant) from Accused-Yadhunath Kolar who is Respondent No-2 in the present case and thereby it shows the deposit of invested amount of Rs. 50,000/- by the complainant with Respondent.No-1 company through Respondent.No-2. This document is marked at Ex.P-3 in this case.<br /> The complainant has also produced copy of withdrawal application along with un-served RPAD covers containing Withdrawal Application addressed to Respondent No- 1 & 2 and they are at Ex.P-4 to P-6. He has also filed office copy of common legal notice issued through his Advocate as stated above at Ex.P-7. The copy of paper publication of common legal notice got published in F £ÀªÀÄä PÀ£ÀßqÀ £ÁqÀÄ Kannada Daily paper dt. 06-05-06 at Ex.P-8. <br /> <br /> 8. As stated above, the notice issued to Respondent NO-1 to his present address as UTP 3666 Central Prison Parapanna Agarahar Bangalore returned duly served vide postal acknowledgement but neither authorized agent nor counsel represented for Respondent No-1 who is UTP.No. 3666. Hence he has been placed Ex-parte. Similarly the notice issued to Respondent NO-2 by RPAD issued by this Forum returned as “Refused” vide postal endorsement. So holding the service as sufficient against Respondent No-2, and as he remained absent when called out so Respondent NO-2 has also been placed Ex-Parte Hence both the Respondents are Ex-parte in this case.<br /> <br /> 9. From a close perusal of Receipt-cum-Investment Certificates and withdrawal application as discussed above it amply shows that complainant has invested/deposited amount with the Respondents who had agreed to repay the same with interest as mentioned in respective Receipt-Cum-Investments-Certificates and failed to repay same with agreed interest in-spite of withdrawal application given to Respondents. As stated above the withdrawal application sent by him returned un-served vide Postal endorsement and that legal notice issued returned un-served vide Postal endorsement and that there was no response for the common legal notice got published in F £ÀªÀÄä PÀ£ÀßqÀ £ÁqÀÄ kannada daily paper. Even to the notice issued to Respondent NO-1 by this Forum to his present address as UTP.No. 3666 Central Prison Parapanna Agarahar Bangalore returned duly served but there was no representation on behalf of this Respondent No-1. So he has been placed Ex-parte. Similarly the notice issued to Respondent No-2 by RPAD by this Forum returned as ‘Refused’ vide postal endorsement and holding the service as sufficient and this Respondent NO-2, when called out remained absent so he was placed Ex-parte. These factors together go to show that the Respondents are deficient in service in not making payment of respective invested amount to the complainant along with agreed rate of interest and the conduct of the Respondents in remaining absent in the proceedings before this Forum in-spite of service of notice as stated above shows that for the reasons best known to them they have remained absent and thereby it amounts to deficiency of service by the Respondents to the demands made by the complainant for refund of his deposited amount with interest. Therefore we hold that the complainant has proved deficiency in service by both the Respondents and so Point No-1 is answered in the affirmative.<br /> POINT NO.2:-<br /> <br /> 10. The complainant has sought for direction for refund of his deposited/invested amount along with interest at 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization and for awarding compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental tension & harassment etc., together with cost of litigation. <br /> In view of our discussion and finding on point No-1 the complainant is entitled for refund of his deposited/invested amount with agreed rate of interest from the date of investment till withdrawal application filed by him. Further he is entitled to interest at 10% p.a. on the invested amount from the date of withdrawal application till realization. As regard to awarding of compensation is concerned having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above we feel justification to allow a global compensation of Rs. 15,000/- including cost of litigation. In this view of the matter we pass the following order:<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> The complaint of the complainant is allowed in part.<br /> Both the Respondents jointly and severally shall refund the deposited amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant-Madhusudhan Kamnoor together with agreed interest from the date of deposits till date of withdrawal application and further interest at 10% p.a. from the date of withdrawal application till realization, on invested amount. Respondents shall also to pay a global compensation of Rs. 15,000/- including cost of litigation.<br /> <br /> Both the Respondents shall comply this order within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum On 29-01-07.)<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> Sri. N.H. Savalagi<br /> President<br /> Dist.Consumer Forum-Raichur.<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> Sri.Pampannagouda <br /> Member.<br /> Dist.Consumer Forum-Raichur.<br /> <br /> On Leave/-<br /> Smt.Kavita Patil <br /> Member.<br /> Dist.Consumer Forum-Raichur.<br /> <br />