Kerala

Trissur

CC/09/82

T.S.Rajan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Priyadarsini Co-operative Hospital Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

21 Mar 2011

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/09/82
 
1. T.S.Rajan
Thadathil House,Peramangalam
Thrissur
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Priyadarsini Co-operative Hospital Ltd
No.R-756,Eranellur,Kechery rep by Secretary
Thrissur
Kerala
2. President
Priyadarsini Co-operaive Hospital Ltd No.R-756,Eranellur,Kechery
Trissur
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE Padmini Sudheesh PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE Rajani P.S. Member
 HONORABLE Sasidharan M.S Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

 
By Smt. Rajani.P.S, Member:
 
          The complainant’s case is as follows: The complainant had deposited Rs.1,63,927/- on 31.3.07 vide FD receipt No.1029 with the respondent firm with 9.5% interest per annum. The F.D receipt was issued on 27.3.07 and the due date of the deposit was on 27.3.08. But the respondents not returned the deposited amount even after repeated demands. Further a lawyer notice was sent on 30.5.08. But no remedy after that also. The act of the respondents amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.
 
          2. The counter filed by the respondents is that it is true that the complainant had deposited Ext. P1 amount with this respondent firm. But the respondent firm is not in a position to return the deposited amount all at once. In order to return the deposited amount of the complainant and several other consumers they have to sale the properties and buildings in the name of the respondent firm. So the respondent firm has decided to give an application before the Registrar of District Co-operative society. When they obtain permission they are ready to return the deposited amount with interest. As the complainant comes under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Hence dismiss.
 
          3. The points for consideration are:
          (1) Was there any deficiency in service on the part of the respondents?
          (2) If so, cost and compensation.
 
          4. The evidence consists of the proof affidavit of complainant and Ext. P1 document and the oral testimony of RW1.
 
          5. Points-1 & 2: The complainant had deposited Rs.1,63,927/- on 31.3.07 with the respondent firm for one year with 9.5% interest. After the due date the complainant demanded to get back the deposited amount and interest. But not given so far. 
 
          6. The respondents in their counter had admitted the deposit made by the complainant and are ready to return the amount after selling the property. The RW1 also deposed that the respondents are not denying the Ext. P1 deposit and further they are ready to deliver the amount. Hence there is no need of further discussion.
          7. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to return the Ext. P1 amount with interest at the rate of 9.5% per annum from the date of deposit till realization with costs Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
 
          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 21st day of March 2011.
 
 
[HONORABLE Padmini Sudheesh]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONORABLE Rajani P.S.]
Member
 
[HONORABLE Sasidharan M.S]
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.