Kerala

Wayanad

CC/99/2011

Shijo Johnson,Alapoikayil House,Arivayal,Pazhuppathur.PO, - Complainant(s)

Versus

P.V.Chacko,Chairman,LIS Reg.No.1741/2,Palakka Court,Ernakulam,Kochi. - Opp.Party(s)

29 Sep 2011

ORDER

 
CC NO. 99 Of 2011
 
1. Shijo Johnson,Alapoikayil House,Arivayal,Pazhuppathur.PO,
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. P.V.Chacko,Chairman,LIS Reg.No.1741/2,Palakka Court,Ernakulam,Kochi.
2. Kuriachan,LIS Reg.No.1741/2,Palakkal Court,Ernakulam,Kochi.
Kochi.
Ernakulam
Kerala
3. P.J.France,Manager,Jyothis Branch Office,Kalpetta.
Kalpetta.
Wayanad
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE MRS. SAJI MATHEW Member
 HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

By Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:-


 

The complainant had purchased units of the Jyothis Project owned by the opposite parties paying Rs.11,000/- on 23.06.2007. The advertisements given by the opposite parties in the medias assured that the deposits would be doubled within a period of two years. The deposit was made at the branch office Kalpetta.


 

 

 

2. On maturity of the deposit, the complainant demanded for the return of money. But the

opposite parties evaded payment. Till this date the deposit is not returned. This is deficiency of service on the side of the opposite parties. Therefore the complainant prays for an order directing the opposite parties to give the deposited amount with other assured benefits or to pay the deposited amount with 18% interest and a compensation of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.1,500/- as cost of the case.


 

3. The opposite parties have not appeared or filed version. Hence the case was set exparte. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A4.


 

4. The matters to be decided are:-

1.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties?.

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?.


 

5. Point No.1:- Exts.A1 to A4 show that the complainant had deposited Rs.11,000/- with the opposite parties and they have not returned the amount. Hence point No.1 is found against the opposite parties.


 


 

6. Point No.2:- There is no evidence to show that the opposite parties have assured to give the double amount of the deposit. However the complainant is entitled to get the deposited amount with reasonable interest and compensation.


 

 

Therefore the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to give the complainant an amount of Rs.11,000/- (Rupees Eleven Thousand Only) with 12% of interest from the date of deposit till the return of the amount. The opposite parties are also directed to give a compensation of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) and cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred Only). This order is to be complied within 30 days of the receipt of this order.


 

Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 29th September 2011.

Date of filing:10.06.2011.


 

 
 
[HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONORABLE MRS. SAJI MATHEW]
Member
 
[HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.