BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM<br /> VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.<br /> PRESENT<br /> SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER<br /> O.P.No. 233/2005 Filed on 02.07.2005<br /> Dated : 30.06.2008<br /> <br /> Complainant:<br /> Lathika Sasidharan, ‘Neelima’, Sreenivasapuram P.O, Varkala, Thiruvananthapuram District. <br /> (By adv. R. Sathi)<br /> Opposite party:<br /> Proprietor, K.R. Financiers, Kattuputhussery, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 603. <br /> This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 18.08.2006, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08.02.2008 and re-heard the complaint. This O.P having been heard on 17.05.2008, the Forum on 30.06.2008 delivered the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> SMT. BEENAKUMARI.A: MEMBER<br /> The facts of the case are as follows: The complainant Lathika Sasidharan has deposited an amount of Rs. 135000/- with the opposite party and the opposite party had issued Term Deposit Certificate bearing KR/F No.A 1360 dated 02.02.2004. At the time of deposit, the opposite party assured that the interest would be paid every month and interest at 18% per annum was being paid every month from 02.03.2004 to 02.08.2004 without any demur. From September 2004 onwards the payment of interest fell in arrears and even though the complainant had requested the opposite party to pay the interest or return the deposit, the opposite party has refused to do so for no reasons known to the complainant. <br /> The complainant submits that the opposite party had assured the complainant to pay the interest without fail as long as the deposits are with him and it was the further assurance of the opposite party that the deposit amount would be returned as and when the complainant asks for it. But quite contrary to the assurance, the opposite party has not done so and he is neither paying interest nor refunding the deposit amount to the complainant. <br /> As per the complainant the opposite party has committed grave deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by which the complainant has been put to great mental agony, financial loss and other hardships. Hence the complainant has filed this complaint before this Forum for the redressal of her grievances. <br /> The opposite party in this case is Proprietor, K.R. Financiers. This forum sent notice to the opposite party two times and the notices were returned with the endorsement the addressee left and addressee not known. Thereafter this Forum issued notice through substituted service. Inspite of substituted service opposite party did not appear before this Forum, hence set exparte on 07.04.2006. The complainant has filed proof affidavit and examined as PW1 and one document was marked as Ext. P1. The affidavit filed by the complainant stands unchallenged. <br /> Points to be considered:<br /> (i)Whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of opposite party?<br /> (ii)Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs sought for?<br /> (iii)Cost of the complaint.<br /> <br /> Points (i) to (iii):- The complainant has produced two documents in this case to prove his complaint. The document marked as Ext. P1 is the term deposit certificate bearing KR/F No.A 1360 dated 02.02.2004 for Rs. 135000/- issued by the opposite party K.R. Financiers. Through this document the complainant has proved that she has deposited the amounts with the opposite party. As per the complaint, the opposite party has paid the monthly interest upto August 2004. The backside of the term deposit certificate shows that the complainant has received the interest till 02.08.2004 as per Ext. P1. The case of the complainant is that thereafter the opposite party did not pay the interest and not turned to return the deposit amount and thereby the opposite party has committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. In view of the above, this Forum finds that the complainant has succeeded to prove her case and there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite party. As per the assurance of the opposite party, the opposite party has to pay the interest to the complainant till the withdrawal of the deposit amount. The opposite party is liable to pay the amount with interest as and when the complainant demands. In this case the complainant states that the rate of interest is 18% per annum. But the complainant has no evidence to prove the rate of interest. Now the Forum fix the interest rate as 12% per annum. The complainant has been forced to approach this Forum due to the deficient act of the opposite party. <br /> In the result the complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 135000/- with 12% annual interest from 02.09.2004 till the realisation of the amount to the complainant along with Rs. 2000/- as costs. Time for compliance two months. <br /> A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 30th June 2008. <br /> <br /> G. SIVAPRASAD,<br /> President.<br /> <br /> BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> S.K. SREELA : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O.P.No.233/2005<br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS: <br /> PW1 - Lathika Sasidharan<br /> II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS:<br /> <br /> P1 - Copy of term deposit certificate bearing No.KR/F No. <br /> A 1360 dated 02.02.2004 for Rs. 135000/- issued by <br /> the opposite party.<br /> <br /> <br /> III OPPOSITE PARTY'S' WITNESS:<br /> NIL<br /> IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS:<br /> NIL<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br />