<br /> <br /> <br /> By ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER.<br /> <br /> The complainant filed this complaint for realization of the deposit amount and admission fee and for compensation.<br /> <br /> It is stated in the complaint as follows:<br /> <br /> The complainant is one of the members of the 1st opp.party Samithy under the Central Government Scheme known in the same and style of “Rajeev Gandhi Deseeya Kudivella Padhathi”. The opp.parties registed a samithy under the said scheme at the Thrikkovilvattom Panchayath, Kollam bearing Reg.No. Q 724/03 and it was name in the name and style as Thripthy Kudivella Suchithua Samithy. At the time of registration of the name of the complainant in the samithy, he paid Rs.25/- as admission fee. The opp.party convinced the complainant that the members who deposit Rs.1,300/- in the samithy will become one of the consumers and such members will be provided with drinking water connection at the nearest opportunity. Believing the same to be true the complainant deposited Rs.1,300/- in 4 instalments Even on expiry of 7 months after deposit of Rs.1,300/- the opp.parties never bothered to take any steps in providing water connection to the complainant’s property. Hence the complaint for realization of the deposit amount and Admission fee including interest and compensation for the mental agony and sufferings undergoing from the opp.parties. The samithy is registered under the Travancore Cochin Sasthra Sahithya Charitable Societies Act, 1955 and it is working under a bye-law and the administration is managed by a General body. In the general body another decision was also taken that if anybody object the water connection through his property to his neighbor, he will not be eligible to get connection to his house. In this case the complainant denied water connection to one of the neighboring member through the complainant’s property and hence the complainant is not entitled for water connection as per by-law. Hence the complaint.<br /> <br /> The opp.parties filed a version contending interalia. The Samithy is working under a byelaw and it is having a General Body which is taking decisions for the proper functioning of the Samithi. The Samithi is working under the guidelines of the byelaw formed for better management and take decisions on various issues from the decisions of the General Body. In the General Body Meeting a decision was taken to the effect that if anybody objecting the water connection which is passing through the property of one person to another and if that person is not permitted to give connection to the other he will not get connection to his house. This policy is followed from very beginning of the scheme. The samithi issued notice to the complainant to the effect that the samithi is ready to return back the contribution amount. But the complainant not received the amount as per notice and filed such a complaint before this Hono’ble Forum, Hence the complaint may be dismissed with compensator cost of this opp.parties.<br /> <br /> <br /> The points that would arise for consideration are:<br /> <br /> [1] Whether the complainant is eligible to get the deposit amount with interest.<br /> [ii] Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties<br /> [iii] Reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> For the complainant PW.1 is examined . Ext.P1 to P5 are marked.<br /> <br /> For the opp.parties DW.1 is examined. Ext. D1. to D6 are marked. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Points [I] to [iii]<br /> <br /> The case of the complainant is that believing the assurance given by the opp.party, the complaint deposit Rs.1300/- in the samithy for getting drinking water connection at the nearest opportunity. But even after 7 months after deposit of Rs.1300/- the opp.party had not taken any steps in providing water connection to the complainant’s property. Hence for realization of the deposit amount with interest, the complainant filed this complaint.<br /> <br /> Opp.party argued that the complainant is not entitled to get the deposit amount’s interest as the opp.party issued notice to the complainant to the effect that the samithy is ready to return back the contribution amount. But the complainant was not ready to receive the amount as per notice. As a matter of fact opp.party has produced only Ext. D5 notice dated 9.6.2004. Opp.party did not produce the postal receipt or the acknowledgement card for supporting Ext.D5 . The producing of Ext.D5 alone cannot be said that opp.party has sent Ext.D5 to the complainant. As opp.party admits that the complainant did not get the water connection opp.party ought to have given back the complainant’s deposit within the time. Here the opp.parties did not do so. Hence there is deficiency in service from the side of opp.parties. The complainant is entitled to get back his deposit amount with interest.<br /> <br /> In the result the complaint is allowed. The opp.parties are directed to give back the deposit amount of Rs.1300/-with 9% interest from the date of deposit till the date of realization of the amount to the complainant. The opp.parties are also directed to give Rs.1000/- as compensation and cost to the proceedings. The order is to be complied with within one month from the date of receiving the order.<br /> <br /> Dated this the 31st day of March, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> INDEX<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the complainant<br /> PW.1. – Jayaprakash<br /> <br /> List of documents for the complainant<br /> P1. – Minutes dt,28.2.2004<br /> P2. – Minutes dt.25.3.2004<br /> P3. - Minutes dt. 9.6.2004<br /> P4. - copy of complaint<br /> P5. – Notice dt. 9.6.2004<br /> P6- byelaw of samithy<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the opp.parties<br /> DW.1. –Sankaran kutty.<br /> <br /> List of documents for the opp.parties<br /> D1. – minute dt. 28.2.2004<br /> D2. – Minute dt. 25.3.2004<br /> D3. – Minutes dt. 9.6.2004<br /> D4. – Complaint<br /> D5. – Notice dt. 9.6.2004<br /> D6. - Byelaw<br /> <br /> <br />