ORDER SRI. K. ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER) Smt. K.V. Stella has filed this complaint before the Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The brief facts of the allegations of the complainant are as follows:- She was a selection Grade Lecturer in St. Michaels College, Cherthala and retired form the service on 31.03.08. While in service she had joined for a Monthly Deposit Scheme (MDS) in the Cooperative Bank of the said college, which was administered by the opposite parties. The said MDS was of 40 installments with Rs. 2500/- per month and she had 2 numbers and the total monthly installments was Rs. 5000/- and the remittance was prompt. The first MDS number was bidded in her name in 10.04.2008 and she had obtained the amount after one month. When contacted the opposite parties for the second MDS on 10.06.2008 for bidding the same, the opposite parties resisted her to participate by stating that there is a case providing before the court for the second MDS. The opposite parties had not furnished any document of any evidence to show the pendency of case. The request to get the details, by Right to Information Act was also not responded. The 2nd opposite party directed her to accept a lesser amount for settling the matter. The MDS was auctioned in 14 months back and it was for Rs. 87,750/- ( Rupees Eighty seven thousand seven hundred and fifty only). She had not authorized anyone in the Bank to include her name in the MDS auction, and that she is eligible for the full amount which comes to Rs. 1 lakh, less commission. The auction matter was intimated to her after the lapse of a period of 14 months. It is realized that there is mis-appropriation of finance by the Bank Clerk and taken a sum of Rs. 2000/- from her SB A/c by forged signature with the knowledge and consent of Bank secretary. The first opposite party was in efficient to correct the fraud. She had not obtained the MDS amount of Rs. 1 lakh so far. Hence this complaint seeking relief. 2. Notices were issued to the parties. The 1st to 3rd opposite parties entered appearance before the Forum and filed version. 4th opposite parties has not filed any version. 4th opposite party se ex-parte by this Forum. 3. In the version of the opposite parties 1 to 3 they have stated that the complaint is false frivolous and vexatious. The complaint was filed by the instigation of one Gigiee Grace, the prior secretary of the said Bank. There is bar to entertain this dispute, since the matter is related to Cooperative Society Act, and to be complaint is not maintainable. Her installments were highly irregular and was in dues, and she bidded MDS on 10.05.2007 at its 23rd auction for Rs. 87,750/-. The said Gigee Grace was the secretary of the Bank at that time. The complainant participated in auction through her, proxy Gigee Grace, and executed valid document authorizing the said Gigee Grace to participate in auction. She bidded her second MDS on 10.05.2008 and present secretary was the secretary at that time. She came to bid for the third time in June 2008, but the Bank did not permit as she bid both of her MDS. Thereafter her installment amount Rs. 2000/- with interest in due to Bank. Bank is not liable to pay any amount more than the bid amount or any interest and even now they are ready to pay Rs. 87,750/- the bid amount without interest. All the acts of the secretary are in strict, compliance with decisions of the General body and Directorate Board. It is false to plead that the third opposite party. Stolen Rs. 2000/- from the SB A/c by forgery. The prior secretary mis-appropriated the funds and manipulated the records. 3. Considering the contentions of the parties, this Forum has raised the issues. 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation and costs from the opposite parties? 4. Issues 1 and 2:- On the side of the complaint she has filed proof affidavit in support of her case and produced documents in evidences. Ext. A1 to A11 marked and she has been cross examined. Ext. A1 is the remittance of 34th and 35th installments of amounts in the opposite parties Bank, on 07.05.08 and 17.06.08. Ext. A2 is the letter dtd. 10.06.2008 of the complainant addressed to the Principal/President of the said Bank. It shows the details of her second MDS and statement of obstruction to participate in the auction due to the resistances of the Clerk of the Bank. Ext. A3 is the letter dtd. 09.07.08 of the Secretary addressed to the complainant, requesting to accept the amount of Rs. 87,750/- bidded by the complainant through proxy on 10.05.2007. Ext. A4 is the photocopy of the Voucher dtd. 06.07.04, to show the withdrawal of Rs. 2000/- from the SB A/c No. 87. Ext. A5 is the copy of the petition of the complainant to the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Bank, showing the details of the second MDS and reliefs to get the amount. Ext. A6 is the copy of the Minutes of the Board Meeting on 04.09.2007. It shows the irregularities in the A/c of the complainant for the amount of Rs. 1 lakh which was taken by the Board Secretary (DBR 23/07-08). Ext. A7 is the copy of the letter dtd. 10.07.07 of one Smt. Angela Jean Thomas to the Principal to release Rs. 88,950/- which was payable to her by bid amount in one Chitty. Ext. A8 copy of the Page No. 109 of the MDS Ledger in the name of the complainant showing that she has 2 shares in the MDS for which remains to be bidded. Ext. A9 is the copy of the Page No. 121 of the MDS Ledger in the name of one Gigiee Grace showing that the MDS of 10.05.07 was in her favour. Ext. A10 is the copy of the page in the Day Book showing that the said Gigiee Grace had received an amount of Rs. 87,750/- as her MDS bid on 10.05.07. Ext. A11 is the copy of the Report dtd. 19.03.08 of the Assistant Registrar, Cherthala to Joint Registrar, Alappuzha, in respect of decisions taken by the General body of the said Bank. 5. Second opposite party has filed proof affidavit for himself and for opposite parties 2 and 3 in support of their case and produced documents, in evidence and he has been cross examined by the complainant. Ext. B1 to B5 marked – Ext. B1 is the copy of the consent letter dtd. 12.03.07 of the complainant to conduct the auction of the chitty. Ext. B2 is the letter dtd. 09.07.08 of the Secretary to the complainant to accept the amount of Rs. 87,750/- or deposit the same in the Bank with proper proceedings. Ext. B3 is the letter dtd. 07.11.08 of the Secretary to the Enquiry Officer, Cooperative Society, Cherthala in connection with the complainant regarding the MDS. Ext. B4 is the letter dtd. 10.07.08 of the Secretary, to the Principal, St. Michaels College, Cherthala in connection with an alleged disturbances on the part of the complainant in conducting auction. Ext. B5 is the letter dtd. 22.08.08 issued by the Secretary of the Society to the Cooperative Inspector, Cherthala regarding the issue of the complainant. We have carefully examined the entire matter of this case and verified the documents produced by the both parties along with their depositions. The complainant has two Monthly Deposit Scheme (MDS) worth Rs. 1 lakh each and the same was within 40 installments with Rs. 2500/- per month and the complainant had remitted the amounts promptly. Out of the above MDS, she had bidded the first MD on 10.04.08 and the amount was issued by her. But it is alleged that she could not be bid the second MD, due to certain irregularities in the institution. It is to be noticed that the 2nd opposite party ie the Secretary had intimated the complainant to reach the Bank in order to release the amount of Rs. 87,750/- which was matured 14 months ago ie on 10.05.07. Since the said amount was not sufficient with regard to the full payment of MD she had not accepted the amount. On perusal of the entire matter, it can be seen that certain irregularities are committed in the A/c by the staff member of the opposite parties. For this complainant is not at all responsible. The contentions raised by the opposite parties cannot be accepted as a valid ground to deny the release of the total amount in the account of in the second MD of the complainant. The documents produced by the opposite parties in support of the contentions cannot be taken into A/c to refuse the release of the MD to the complainant. All the contentions raised by the opposite parties are without any bonafides. There is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. On verification of the entire evidence of both parties, it can be seen that there is no justification on the part of the opposite parties to retain the amount of the MDS, which is payable to the complainant unnecessarily. The entire proceedings taken by the opposite parties are irregular and illegal and it was taken in order to defeat the interest of the complainant. The whole facts, of the case and exhibits produced by both parties shows that the complainant is fully entitled to get back, the full MDS with interest from the opposite parties. We have perused the Exts. A1 to A11 and B1 to B5 in detail. After verification of the same, we are fully convinced that the allegations raised by the complainant are to be treated the genuine. In this context, the issues are found in favour of the complainant and hence the complaint is to be allowed. In the result, we hereby direct the opposite parties 1 and 2 to release the MDS amount of Rs. 1 lakh after deducting the reasonable commission from the said amount, and pay with interest at the rate of 14% from the date of 10.06.08. Considering the facts and circumstances of this matter, we are not directing to give any compensation and costs to the complainant by the opposite parties. We further direct the opposite parties 1 and 2 to pay back the said amounts within the 2 months from the date of the receipt of this order. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of June 2009. Sri. K. Anirudhan Sri. Jimmy Korah Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi Appendix:- Evidence of the complainant:- PW1 - K.V. Stella (Witness) Ext. A1 - Receipts dated 07.05.08 & 17.06.08 (Photocopy) Ext. A2 - True copy of the Letter dated 10.06.08 Ext. A3 - True copy of the Letter dated 09.07.08 Ext. A4 - Receipt dated 06.07.04 (Photocopy) Ext. A5 - Photocopy of the complaint to the Joint Registrar Ext. A6 - Minutes dated 04.09.07. Ext. A7 - Letter dated 16.07.07 Ext. A8 - Copy of the page 109 of the MDS Ledger Ext. A9 - Copy of the page 121 of the MDS Ledger Ext. A10 - Copy of the page in the Day Book of MDS Ext. A11 - Copy of the Report dated 19.03.08. Evidence of the opposite parties:- RW1 - Pious Mathai (Witness) Ext. B1 - True copy of the Letter dated 12.03.07 Ext. B2 - True copy of the Letter dated 09.07.08 Ext. B3 - True copy of the Letter dated 07.11.08 Ext. B4 - True copy of the Letter dated 10.07.08 Ext. B5 - True copy of the Letter dated 22.08.08 // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F. Typed by:- vo/- Compared by:-
| | [HONORABLE K.Anirudhan] Member[HONORABLE JIMMY KORAH] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE Smt;Shajitha Beevi] Member | | 
