Before the District consumers Forum:Kurnool
Present:Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President
And
Smt C.Preethi M.A., LL.B., Member
Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., member
Monday the 4th day of August, 2003
C.D.No.28/2002
V.Jeevaiah, Retired Clerk,
H.no.45/178B,
Narasimha Reddy Nagar,
R.S.Road,
Kurnool. … In person
-Vs-
Nagarjuna Finance Limited,
Nagarjuna Hills,
Panjagutta,
Hyderabad. … In Person
O R D E R
1. The consumer dispute case of the complainant is filed under section 12 of the C.P. Act seeking the payment of the matured amount from the opposite party at an earliest possibility.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case as per his invalid complaint which is wanting due verification of its contents by the complainant, are that he has deposited Rs.6,000/- with the opposite party on 03.02.1997 for a term of 5 months and on its maturity the amount payable is Rs.12,000/- on 08.11.2000 the opposite party has sent an information as to payment of deposit amount at Rs.6,750/- and Rs.7,500/- as 1st and 2nd installments on 03.11.2001, 03.11.2002 respectively, but did neither the opposite party kept up said promise nor responded to the telephone calls, letters and to his registered letter dated 27.12.2001. Hence resorted to this Forum for redressal of his grievance.
3. The complainant besides filing his sworn affidavit in reiteration of complaint averments, relied upon documentary record Viz., Receipt dated 16.10.2000 issued by opposite party Branch at Kurnool in token of the receipt of the FDR No.C450-801178 submitted by the complainant for the maturity amount, the courier receipt dated 09.12.2000 addressed to the opposite party receipt for registered post letter dated 27.12.2001 sent to the opposite party courier receipt dated 15.10.2001 addressed by the complainant to the opposite party and they are marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A4.
4. In pursuance of notice of this Forum as to this case even though of the High Court ordering interim stay of all further proceedings in the Consumer Forums of State of Andhra Pradesh vide orders in WMP No.17593/2001 in W.P.No.14064/2001 dated 11.07.2001 and thereby on account of said stay did not file any of its written version. The Honourable High Court of Andhra Pradesh in its order dated 09.04.2003 in the above said matter has vacated the said interim stay and inspite of the said vacation of the stay the opposite party did not contest the case by filing any of his written version in defence to the complaint averments.
5. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out any deficiency conduct of the opposite party and any deficient service of the opposite party at him and thereby any of his entitlenss to the reliefs sought?:-
6. The Ex.A1 dated 16.10.2000 indicates the receipt of the FDR No.C450-801178 for matured value of Rs.12,000/- agreeing to repay the said matured value of amount as per the Company Law Board Order dated 29.02.2000. The said receipt was issued by the Kurnool Branch of the opposite party. The courier receipts in Ex.A2 and Ex.A4 the postal receipt in Ex.A3 indicates the complainant addressing the opposite party through courier and by post. The above said circumstances indicates the opposite party obtaining FDR of the complainant for payment of the maturity value and was remained several times by the complainant for the payment of the said matured amount and the opposite parties non responding to the said request of the complainant.
7. Inspite of vacation of the stay by High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide its order dated 09.04.2003 the opposite party did not contest the case by filing any of his written version in defence to complainant’s case. Hence the complainant’s case is remaining un-rebutted by the opposite party as to the obligation of the opposite party to refund the amount on its maturity and thereby the said conduct of the opposite party is amounting to deficiency of service.
8. Even though the opposite party’s place of business and operations is Hyderabad, but a part of its cause of action to the complainant is appearing to be arising in the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum as the receipt of the matured FDR was issued by the opposite parties Branch at Kurnool. Therefore, the case of the complainant is remaining within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum for entertaining the grievances of the complainant.
9. Therefore, the case of the complainant is allowed ordering the opposite party to pay the matured amount of Rs.12,000/- under Supra Stated FDR with interest at 12% per annum from the date of maturity to its realization and Rs.500/- towards the costs of the case. Time granted for compliance of the above order by the opposite party is one month from the date of receipt of this order. In default, the opposite party shall be liable to pay the Supra awarded amount with 12% interest from the date of default till its realization.
Dictated to the Stenographer, typed to the Dictation, corrected by us, pronounced in the open Court, this the 4th day of August, 2003
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite parties:- Nil
List of Exhibits marked for the complainant:
Ex.A1 Acknowledgement dated 16.10.2000 issued by Branch Office at Kurnool to the complainant.
Ex.A2 Consignment note no.632401 dated 09.12.2000 of Sanchar Courier.
Ex.A3 Postal Receipt No.4353 dated 27.12.2001.
Ex.A4 Courier Receipt No.683102 dated 15.10.2001.
List of Exhibits marked for the opposite party:- Nil
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER
