Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/410/2015

Janardhan M Bhat - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ramesh G Shiragavi. Chairman,The Belagavi Liberal Credit Souhard Co-Op Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

K R Shaha

20 Nov 2015

ORDER

(Order dictated by Shri. B.V.Gudli, President)

: ORDER :

          I. The complainants are same in the cases, their grievances, allegations and the facts pleaded are same except the details of the deposits by the respective complainants. In all the cases the O.P. society is same, represented by Chairman and Vice Chairman, Directors and General Manager. Hence for convenience all the cases are disposed of by the common order.

          II. Since there are 3 cases and same number complainants are there having same addresses and particulars of their deposits being different, for brevity and also for clarity and to avoid confusion, names of the parties of the particular cases.

          III. The parties will be referred to as complainant/s, and opponents instead of serial number, as in some cases their numbers are different.

          1) The relevant facts of the cases are that the respective complainants have filed the complaints u/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in banking service of non refund of the fixed deposits/deposit.

          2) Notices were issued against Opponents, said notices were served on opponents. Inspite of service of notice O.Ps. remained absent. Hence they have placed exparte.

          3) In support of the claim of the complainant, complainants have filed his affidavit by way of evidence and original F.D.Rs. are produced by the complainant.

          4) We have heard the arguments and perused the records.

          5) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opponents and entitled to the reliefs sought?

          6) Our finding on the point is partly in affirmative, for the following reasons.

:: REASONS ::

          7) The complainant filed his affidavit by way of evidence and he has stated in his affidavit that for the future maintenance and solve the domestic financial problem in future they were very much interested to invest their saved money in fixed deposits scheme and to get better interest. The complainants have approached the opponents society at Vadagaon Branch and they explained about their fixed deposit scheme and also promised that at the nick of time, they  will immediately release the invested amount with accrued interest and as promised by them without any obstructions. Hence believing their words. They have invested the saved money in the said fixed deposits with the opponents at Vadagaon Branch office as detailed under;

SL. No.	Complaint No.	FDR Nos.	Amounts Deposited	Date of Deposit	Maturity Amount	Date of Maturity	Interest
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1	370/2015	04081	50,000	7/1/2013	57,000	7/1/2014	14%
2	371/2015	02744	1,00,000	3/5/2013	1,01,008	18/6/2013	8%
2	410/2015	00988	2,00,000	12/2/2013	2,28,000	12/2/2014	14%

 

The complainant further stated that after the maturity and to solve the domestic financial problems complainants approached opponents branch At Vadagaon, but it was found that, the said branch office was closed and all the assets and liabilities of the said branch have been taken over by the above said opponents. The complainants have personally approached to the opponents head office and requested for the release of the said fixed deposit matured amount with interest, but the opponents are postponing the same on one or the other reasons.

          8) Lastly fed up with the opponents behavior they have issued legal notice through their advocate on 28/5/2015 and 1/6/2015 calling upon the opponents No.1 to 12 for the immediate release of F.D. amount with interest, but they failed to make payment as mentioned above within the stipulated period till today. Thus opponents caused deficiency of service and due to the deficiency on the part of the opponents their financial problems are not solved within time. Hence complainants constrained to file this complaint before this forum.

          9) On perusal documents produced by the complainants  F.D. Receipts which is are standing in the name of complainants and also produced F.D.Rs. for having deposited amount in the O.P. society. Inspite of maturity the opponents have not paid the maturity amount. O.Ps. fails to pay F.D.Rs. amount after maturity period. The O.Ps. after service of the notice, failed to appear before the forum and failed to pay maturity amount and hence there is deficiency in service on the part of the opponents. On perusal contents of the affidavit and documents produced by the complainant. The complainant has proved deficiency in service.

          10) Taking into consideration of the facts, evidence on record and the discussion made here before deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. has been proved.

          11) Taking in to consideration of various aspects and the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (2011) SCCR 268 and of the Hon’ble Apex Commission reported in 2013 (2) CPR 574 as well as other subsequent decisions absolutely it is just and necessary to impose cost on daily basis if order remains uncomplied within the period fixed for compliance of the order, so as to have feeling and pinch.

          12) Accordingly, following order.

: ORDER :

          The complaint is partly allowed.

          The O.Ps. represented by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, Directors and General Manager jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.57,000/- in respect of FDR No.04081, a sum of Rs.1,01,008/- in respect of FDR No.02744 and  pay a sum of Rs. 2,28,000/- under F.D.R. No.00988 with future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from 8/1/2014, 19/6/2013 and 13/2/2014 respectively till realization of the entire amount.

          The O.Ps. represented by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, Directors and General Manager jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.2,000/- each towards costs of the proceedings.

          Order shall be complied within one month from the date of the order.

If the order is not complied within stipulated period, O.Ps. are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.50/- per day to the complainant from the date of disobedience of order, till the order is complied.

The original order shall be kept in complaint No.370/2015 and the true copy in other clubbed cases.

          (Order dictated, corrected & then pronounced in the Open Forum on this 20^th day of November 2015)

          Member                    Member                    President

gm*