By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:
The complaint filed for the refund of the amount of Rs.3,00,625/- deposited in the scheme run by the Opposite Party.
2. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The Complainant purchased 481 units of the scheme run by the Opposite Party giving Rs.3,00,625/-. The Complainant was given receipts acknowledging the acceptance of the amount. The Complainant approached the Opposite Party time and again for the refund of the amount deposited. The Opposite Party titled the scheme as 'Deepasthambham' Project and offered that the amount entrusted to the Opposite Party would be doubled. In addition to that extra amount out of taking lottery commission would also be paid to the Complainant. The amount deposited by the Complainant reached the maturity period on 06.07.2007. The Complainant directly approached the Opposite Party on 01.06.2009 for the refund of the amount. The non refund of the amount deposited is a deficiency in service.
3. There may be an order directing the Opposite Party to refund Rs.3,00,625/- with an interest at the rate of 18% in case if it found that the amount deposited could not be given back doubling the amount along with cost of Rs.2,500/- and compensation of Rs.5,000/-
4. The Opposite Party filed version in short it is as follows:- The claim of the Complainant that the amount of Rs.3,00,625/- was deposited in the scheme run by the Opposite Party is in correct. The amount was entrusted to the Opposite Party on 07.2.2005 and 09.09.2005. The complaint filed is not maintainable and it is barred by limitation of time.
5. The allegation of the Complainant is that the amount deposited would be doubled within a period of two years and as such published in visual and other medias are not correct. The Complainant joined the scheme agreeing the terms and conditions of this special scheme. The refund of the amount is strictly based on seniority when joined the scheme. There is no deposit for interest. It is only a method of entrusting the amount in LIS Deepasthambham Project. The profit of the scheme is offered to the subscribers out of prices in taking lottery tickets and magazines. Those were also sent to the party duly. The Opposite Party has not offered any maturity period or any time fixed for the additional benefit of commission. The commission profits out of prizes from the lottery tickets would be given to the party without any stipulated time in the scheme. (Contd.....3)
6. Opposite Party purchased lottery tickets worth of Rs.1,68,350/- and issued magazines to the Complainant subsequently. The Complainant had also received Rs.35,754/- from the Opposite Party firm. Out of prizes won in lottery the commission and other benefits will be given to the party strictly on seniority basis. There is no regard of any maturity period. The Opposite Parties were running the schemes smoothly without any allegation. Mean while the account of the Opposite Party was freezed by judicial order and the easy flow of the scheme was hindered. The allegation of the Complainant to get back the amount deposited in several fold is not supported by any reasons. The Opposite Parties are ready to give back the entrusted amount after deducting the cost of lottery tickets and magazines. The complaint is be dismissed with cost to the Opposite Parties.
7. The points in consideration are:-
Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?
Relief and cost.
8. Points No.1 and 2:- The Complainant filed proof affidavit, Exts.A1 and A2 are the documents produced. The Complainant is also examined as PW1.
9. It is already admitted that the Opposite Party that they received Rs.3,00,625/- towards the Deepasthambham Project vide receipt No. 83608 and 51196. According to the Opposite Party the entrusted amount as no maturity period. The Complainant demanded the refund of the amount has assured when she joined the scheme. The amount deposited by the Complainant was not refunded. The deposited sum according to the Opposite Party increases through lottery commission. The claim of the Opposite party that there was no assurance on their part to double the amount. In the oral testimony of the Complainant it is seen that there was assurance at the time of joining the Deepasthambham Project that the amount deposited would be doubled. The Complainant knows that lottery commission is an another source to increase the amount deposited. The Opposite Party contended that the Complainant already received Rs.35,754/- from the Opposite Party firm as lottery prizes and but it is not admitted by the Complainant no evidence is brought out by the Opposite Party to substantiate that Rs.35,754/- is received by the Complainant as commission in lottery prizes. In the light of the evidence and documents produced it is to be considered that the Opposite Party has not refunded any part of the sum deposited by the Complainant. The Complainant is to be refunded the amount deposited with interest.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties are directed to refund the entire amount deposited Rs.625/- (Rupees Six hundred and Twenty Five only) at the rate of 12% from 07.07.2005 onwards and for Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh only) at the rate of 12% from 09.09.2005 till the payment. The Complainant is also entitled for Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards cost and compensation. The amount is to be refunded by the Opposite Party jointly and severally within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 31st January 2011.
Date of filing: 09.09.2010.
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
A P P E N D I X
Witness for the Complainant:
PW1. Soniya Jose Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Copy of Receipt No.83608.
A2. Copy of Receipt No.51196.
Exhibit for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
