By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:
Brief of the complaint:- Attracted by the advertisements in all medias regarding the money duplication project the complainant deposited Rs.40,000/- on 17.06.2005 and Rs.31,250/- on 19.07.2005 in LIS Deepasthambham Project under the ownership and supervision of opposite parties. Towards the payments the opposite parties issued receipts bearing No.38798 and 60685 respectively. As per the said project opposite parties offered double of the deposited amount together with lottery prize for a period of one year will be released to the complainant. After the said period the complainant had renewed the deposited amount in the same scheme for further two years. On completion of the term the complainant approached the opposite parties branch office several times to release the entire amount with all offered benefits of the scheme. On 02.12.2010 the opposite party granted a bonus amount of Rs.2,500/- towards the said deposit. After the completion of the stipulated term the opposite parties were not ready to release the promised amount. This is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. So he prays for an Order directing the opposite parties to refund the double amount for the each period of one year along with the lottery prize and compensation of Rs.10,000/- with the cost of the proceedings.
2. Notices sent to opposite parties. Opposite parties filed Vakalath on 18.06.2012 and sought time for filing version. Sufficient time has granted to opposite parties for filing version but opposite parties not filed their version within the stipulated period. Hence opposite parties set ex-parte on 24.08.2012 and proceeded with the case.
3. On considering the complaint and affidavit the following points are to be considered:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2. Relief and Cost.
4. Point No.1 :- To prove complainant's case, he filed proof affidavit and produced Exts.A1 and A2 documents. Ext.A1 and A2 are the receipts issued by opposite parties bearing No.38798 and 60585 respectively. The inception of the complainant in the scheme was on 17.06.2005 and 19.07.2005 respectively. Nothing else is produced by the complainant to substantiate his case. After the completion of the term complainant approached opposite parties several times to refund the entire amount offered with all benefits of the scheme. But even after the completion of the stipulated term opposite parties are not ready to release the promised amount. This is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Point No.1 is found accordingly.
5. Point No.2:- In order to prove his case complainant produced only two receipts. No other documents produced before us to substantiate his case. Nothing else is produced before us to prove offers in the scheme such as Lottery prize, double of deposit amount etc... However the non refund of the amount deposited is nothing but deficiency of service from the part of the opposite parties. So the complainant is entitled to get refund of the deposited amount along with reasonable interest and cost. Point No.2 is decided accordingly.
In the result the compliant is partly allowed. The opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.71,250/- (Rupees Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty) only along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of joining the scheme till the realization of the full amount. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only towards cost and compensation. The opposite parties are jointly and severely liable to comply this Order within one month from the date of receipt of this Order.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the 31st day of May 2013.
Date of Filing: 16.05.2012.
PRESIDENT :Sd/ MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PERSIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
Nil.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Copy of Receipt. Dt:17.06.2005.
A2. Copy of Receipt. Dt:19.07.2005.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
