By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:
The complaint filed against the opposite parties alleging the deficiency in service for non refund of the amount deposited in the scheme named LIS Deepasthambham and Jyothis Project.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The opposite parties were extensively advertised through media like Newspaper, Television etc.. that they are launching a new scheme of deposit in which the deposit amount will be doubled within a few period and also providing lottery commission for the customers. The opposite party No.1 assure that the deposited amount will be doubled within two years and also other benefits in the lottery will be given. On believing this on 27.08.2005 the complainant deposited Rs.1,250/-, Rs.625/-, Rs.625/- and Rs.625 as per Receipt Nos.79106, 79093, 79092 and 79083 respectively. On 20.05.2009 complainant deposited Rs.3,000/-, Rs.11,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.25,000/- as per Receipt Nos.64933, 64930, 64929 and 64931 respectively. The amount deposited and Receipts issued at Kalpetta in the Branch office of Opposite Parties. Thereafter when the maturity time attained the complainant approached the opposite parties and demanded to return of amount deposited as per the promise. But opposite party requested time to pay the amount, which repeated several occasions and till this date opposite parties have not paid the amount due to the complainant as per the promise. The complainant alleging that the non refund of the deposited amount with all offered benefits of the scheme in time is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. So he prays for an Order to refund of the deposited amount as promised together with cost and compensation of Rs.13,000/-.
3. Notices served to opposite parties, they filed Vakalath and written version.
4. Version filed by opposite parties in brief as follows:- Opposite parties stated that the time limit for filing this complaint is already being over and the complaint is not maintainable and barred by limitation. Moreover the opposite parties didn't given any assurance to return double of the amount deposited to the complainant within a period. It is also submitted that the total amount of Rs.82,125/- of the complainant was not “deposited” but only entrusted with the Jyothis Project of opposite party's firm for supplying lottery tickets and magazines and it is further stated that the complainant has no legal right to claim return of the deposited amount which was entrusted for the purchase of lottery and magazines. So they prays for a dismissal of the complaint.
5. On considering the complaint, affidavit and version the following points are to be considered:-
1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Relief and Cost.
6. Point No.1:- The evidence in this case consist of testimony of PW1, chief affidavit of the complainant and Exts.A1 series (8 Nos) documents. Ext.A1 Series are the Receipts bearing Nos.79106, 79093, 79092 and 79083 for Rs.1,250/-, Rs.625/-, Rs.625/- and Rs.625 respectively dated 27.08.2005 and Receipt Nos.64933, 64930, 64929 and 64931 for Rs.3,000/-, Rs.11,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.25,000/- respectively dated 20.05.2009. Nothing else is produced by the complainant to prove the offers in the scheme such as lottery prize, double of deposit amount etc... As per the complaint, complainant approached the opposite parties several times to get back the deposited amount with promised benefits of the scheme. But opposite parties failed to refund the promised amount. The contention raised by the opposite parties such as limitation and jurisdiction aspects need more proof. No evidence produced from the part of the opposite parties to defend their case. If that be so the non refund of the deposited amount within a reasonable time is deficiency in service from the part of the opposite parties. The Point No.1 is decided in favor of complainant.
7. Point No.2:- We have examined the entire evidence and documents produced before us. We are of the opinion that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties, hence the complainant is entitled to get refund of the deposited amount that is Rs.82,125/- along with reasonable interest. Point No.2 is decided accordingly.
In the result the compliant is partly allowed. The opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.82,125/- (Rupees Eighty Two Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Five) only along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of joining the scheme till the date of full payment. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) only towards cost and compensation. The opposite parties are jointly and severely liable to comply this Order within one month from the date of receipt of this Order.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the 17th day of July 2013.
Date of Filing: 29.01.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Radhika. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
Exts.A1(Series). 1. Receipt. Dt:27.08.2005.
2. Receipt. Dt:27.08.2005.
3. Receipt. Dt:27.08.2005.
4. Receipt. Dt:27.08.2005.
5. Beneficiary Certificate. Dt:20.05.2009.
6. Beneficiary Certificate. Dt:20.05.2009.
7. Beneficiary Certificate. Dt:20.05.2009.
8. Beneficiary Certificate. Dt:20.05.2009.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
