IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA

Wednesday the 31^st  day of  August, 2011

Filed on 30.04.2011

Present

1. Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
2. Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
3. Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)

in

C.C.No.148//2011

Between

     Complainants:-                                                               Opposite parties:-

1.  St. Sebastian                                                     1.         Providence chitty Fund

     Maranananthara Sahaya Fund                                        Eramalloor, Cherthala represented

     Ward No. 2, Kodamthuruth Panchayath                        by its Partner, Joyce Antony,

      Ezhupunna South P.O., Cherthala                                 Nalampurackal Padigatinkara

      Taluk, represented by its President                                Thekkum Muri,   Thuravoor South P.O. 

      T.J.Vincent, Toj Mahal, Ezhupunna                               Cherthala Taluk

      South P.O., Ward No.3 of

      Kodamthuruth Panchayath, Cherthala    2.         Robin Antony, Nalampurackal

                                                                                               -do-                 -do-

2.  Sri.M.O.Joy, Oonattu Ezhupunna South            

P.O., Ward No.3 of  Kodamthuruth                 3.         Smt.Kathreena Augustine                                        Panchayath, Cherthala Taluk                                         Nalampurackal, Thuravoor South

      (Secretary of  St. Sebastian                                           P.O., Puthenchantha, Cherthala – 688532

      Marananthara Sahaya Fund,   -do-)                             

     (By Adv. E.D. Zacharias)                                   4.         Saji Augustine, Nalampurackal

                                                                                                Thuravoor South infront of Panchayath 

                                                                                                Office, Thuravoor, Thuravoor South P.O.

                                                                                                Cherthala – 688 532    

                                                                                    5.         Sibi, Nalampurackal, Thuravoor South                                                                                      P.O., Puthenchantha, Cherthala – 688532

                                                                                    6.         Sojan,            -do-                -do-       

7.         Sony, Thachethu (Kochilattu)

Ezhupunna South P.O., East of

Ezhupunna P.S.Junction

Cherthala – 688 550

O R D E R

SMT. N. SHAJITHA BEEVI (MEMBER)

Complainants  have filed this complaint before the Forum alleging deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties.  The main allegations are as follows:- The opposite parties were engaged in the business of financial dealings by name and style M/s. Providence Chitty Fund, Eramalloor, which is engaged in the business of money lending, chitty, invited money deposit from the public and also collecting money by way of daily collection.  As per the request of the opposite parties, the  complainants have deposited Rs.50,000/- on 21.2.2008  before the opposite parties’ firm in A/c No.8/2008.  At the time of the  deposit the opposite parties issued pass book to the complainants  after sealed and signed, while so  the partners Sri.Augustine Varghese and Sri. Thomas Antony were expired  and after that the legal heirs of the said members are administered the firm.  Since the opposite parties defaulted the repayment, they had requested the opposite parties to return the amount.  But the opposite parties have not turned up.  The opposite parties had abanded the business  and closed the firm.  The depositor along with other depositors enquired about the said promoters.  But it was learnt that the opposite parties were absconded.  Complainants have not obtained any relief from the opposite parties regarding the payment.  Hence this complaint. 

2.  Notices were issued to the opposite parties.  The opposite parties were not appeared before this Forum.  Hence  they were set exparte.   

3. Considering the contentions of the parties, this Forum has raised the following issues for consideration:-

a) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties?

b) Whether the complainants are entitled to get the amount from the opposite parties?

c) Compensation and costs?

            4.  Issues 1 to 3:-        The first complainant has filed proof affidavit on behalf of himself and 2^nd complainant  and filed one document in evidence – Exts.A1 marked.  Ext.A1 is  the original pass book issued at the time of the deposited amount of Rs.50,000/-.

            5. We have fully verified the matter involved in this case and verified the document produced by the complainants in evidence.  It is alleged by the complainant that they had deposited a total sum of Rs.50,000/-  before the opposite parties’ firm.   In spite of the repeated requests of the complainants, the opposite parties have not take sincere attempt to repay the amount with interest to the complainants in time.  Instead of taking necessary earnest steps to repay the amount, the opposite parties have evaded from the liability purposefully.  The action of the opposite parties shows their cheating nature and unfair trade practice.  The complainants are fully entitled to get the amount from the opposite parties.  But the opposite parties  have not turned up.  The entire action of the opposite parties shows that there is grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence and unfair trade practice.  The opposite parties are bound to repayment of the amount and that there is no justification on the side of the opposite parties to deny the repayment.     Since there is grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence, unfair trade practice and cheating on the side of the opposite parties, the opposite parties are fully liable to pay compensation and cost to the complainants.   The opposite parties have jointly and severally liable to repay the amount with interest to the complainants.  So considering the facts and circumstances of this case and after perusal of the documents in evidence, we are of the strong view that the allegations of the complainants against the opposite parties are to be treated as genuine.  In this context, the complaint is to be allowed.  All the issues are found in favour of the complainants.  Hence the complaint is allowed.

            In this result we hereby direct the opposite parties to return the remitted amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) to the complainants with 12% interest from 20.11.2008  to till the repayment of the entire amount and further pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation to the complainants  for their mental agony, pain, sufferings, physical strain, loss and harassment of the opposite parties by way of  purposeful denial of the repayment of the deposit amount with interest in time to the complainants, due to the grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence, cheating and unfair trade practice of the opposite parties and further pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the complainants as costs of this proceedings.  We hereby further ordered that the complainants are free to proceed against the assets of the opposite parties in case any default to pay the said amount to them.  We further direct the opposite parties to comply with this order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

            Complaint is allowed.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31^st  day of  August, 2011.

Sd/- Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi:                  Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah:

Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan:

Appendix:-

Evidence of the complainant:- 

Ext. A1            -           Original Pass book      

Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil

                                                                                                                     By Order                                                                                                                                       

Senior Superintendent

To

         Complainants/Opposite parties/S.F.

Typed by:- pr/- 

Compared by:-