Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/186/2015

Shankar B Savadi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Represented By Manager Of Shree Basaveshwar Cr Sou Saha Nyt Satti - Opp.Party(s)

K B Khadakbhavi

18 Jan 2017

ORDER

                

ADDITIONAL  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BELAGAVI

C.C.No.186/2015

 

                     Date of filing: 25/03/2015

 

                                                                  Date of disposal: 18/01/2017

 

P R E S E N T :-

 

	(1)	Shri. A.G.Maldar, B.Com,LL.B. (Spl.) President.
	(2)	Smt.J.S. Kajagar, B.Sc. LLB. (Spl.)  Lady Member.

 

 

COMPLAINANT     -

Shri.Shankar S/o Bhimappa Savadi, Age: Major, Occ: Service, R/o: Kokatnur (Suttatti), At: Athani, Dist. Belagavi.             (Rep. by Sri.K.B.Khadakbhavi, Adv.)

 

- V/S -

 

OPPOSITE PARTY  -

Shree Basaveshwar Credit Souhard Sahakari Niyamit Satti, Athani Branch, Near SBI Athani, Tq: Athani, Dist. Belgaum, Rep. by its Present Manager.                                           (Rep. by Sri.R.S.Kamat, Adv)

JUDGEMENT

 

By  Sri.A.G. Maldar, President.

 

 

1)         U/s. 12 of the C.P. Act, the complainant has filed the complaint against the OP alleging deficiency in service of non payment of the matured F.D. amount. 

 

          2) After issue of notice to the OP. The OP has appeared through his Counsel and resisted the claim of the complainant by filing his written version and denied the all allegation and deficiency in service and contend that, there is no cause of action and alleged that, the complainant has not approached the OPs society and allegations made are baseless.  

 

          3) Both the parties have filed their affidavits in lieu of evidence in support of their case. The complainant has produced 03 documents, for sake of our conveniences, we have marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-3. On the contrary the OP has not produced any document. The Advocate for complainant has argued the matter and we have taken as heard the argument of OP.

 

4) Now, the following points that arise for our consideration in deciding the case are;

 

 

 

1. Whether the complainant has prove that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP for not settling the payment of F.D. amount?

 

2.  What order?

 

 

          5) Our finding on the points are as follows;

 

1.      Affirmative.

          2.      As per final Order.

:: R E A S O N S ::

 

          6) The evidence on record establish that, the complainant has kept a sum of Rs.25,000/- in fixed deposit under F.D. No.036, through SBI A/c No.3026,  on dtd: 29.12.2006 for a period of 78 months with interest @ 11 % p.a. to mature on 30.06.2013 as value of Rs.50,000/- and further the complainant pleaded in the complaint in respect of F.D.No.072 for Rs.50,000/-, when we have perused the said F.D. receipt, no doubt it is true that, first of all it is not easily visible and the complainant has no substantiate that, F.D.No.072 for Rs.50,000/- has been kept, why the complainant has pleaded in the complaint that, the F.D.No.072 is Rs.50,000/- without any cogent proof and when the Forum has detailed scanned the said F.D. receipt it reveals the back side of the FD receipt it is clearly mentioned and written as “ oÉêÀt ªÀiÁrzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 09.12.2006, ªÀÄgÀÄ ¥ÁªÀw ¢£ÁAPÀ: 10.06.2013 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄgÀÄ ¥ÁªÀw ¨É¯É gÀÆ.4,000/-“ it means that, the FD maturity amount for Rs.4,000/-. Under such circumstances, it is the duty of the Counsel of the complainant as well as complainant to plead and explain in detail in respect of FDs. But, in this case neither complainant nor counsel of the complainant attend the court to explain, whether the FD amount Rs.50,000/- or maturity amount is Rs.4,000/- and further observed that, the complainant is suppressed the material facts before this Forum and he has filed false affidavit and stating that the F.D.No.072, through SBI A/c No.3012, of the Op bank, the same was also matured to the tune of Rs.50,000/- with accrued interest, the same pleading is not supported with document. Therefore, it is a warn to the complainant, whenever approach to the Judicial or Quacy Judicial, the complainant should be fair with clean hand and explained in detail, whatever case may be. Therefore, the claiming of Rs.50,000/- without keeping the FD is not acceptable.

 

 

          7) Grievance of the complainant is that, after the maturity of F.D. amount and inspite of the demands made, the maturity value remained unpaid. The complainant in his complaint has contended that, he has requested to the OP refund the said F.D. amounts alongwith the maturity value. But, the OP is postponing the same by assigning one or other reasons, without valid reasons. The complainant further contended that, it is obligatory on the part of OP to refund the said F.D. amounts, but OP is failed to refund the same and thereby OP has committed the deficiency of service as contemplated under the provision of C.P. Act. The OP contended in the version and denied the deficiency in service and contend that, there is no cause of action and alleged that, the complainant has not approached the society and allegations made are false and baseless. The OP at para No.3 of the written version has admitted the remittance of the deposits and contended that, the complainant has never approached the OP bank with the maturity claims and prayed to dismiss the complaint. In order to establish this  contention, the OP has not filed supporting affidavit evidence and not furnished any material documents to accept the contention contended in written version. Therefore, in our consider view that, the OP has failed to establish as alleged in the written version.

 

8) The complainant has established their case in respect of deficiency of service on the part of the OP by filing the supporting affidavit evidence and material documents i.e. the original F.D. receipts is on record the said documents have been marked as Ex.P-3, for sake of our convenience. These facts pleaded in the complaint and stated by the complainant is not disputed or denied by the OP. Hence, the said matured F.D. amount of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.4,000/- as per matured F.D. payable to the complainant by the OP bank is proved.

 

9) No-doubt it is true that, the conduct of OP in not paying the matured amount, even after service of legal notice which is already marked as Ex.P-1, certainly amounts to deficiency in service. The OP not only liable to pay the matured amount, but also liable to pay interest @ 8 % p.a. on the matured F.D. amount of Rs.50,000/- only, from the date of maturity i.e. 30.06.2013 till the date of payment. It is just and proper to award a compensation of Rs.1,000/- for inconvenience and mental agony and we also award towards litigation expenses of Rs.500/-. Hence, we answer to the above point No 1 in affirmative.  Hence, we proceed to pass the following.

 

 O R D E R

 

         

For the reason discuss above, the complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of the C.P. Act – 1986 is here by partly allowed with costs.

 

          The OP is directed to pay the matured F.D. amount of Rs.50,000/- with interest @ 8 % p.a. from the date of maturity i.e. 30.06.2013 till the date of payment and also Rs.4,000/- towards F.D.No.072 maturity amount. 

 

          Further, the OP is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.500/- towards cost of the proceedings.

 

          The order shall be complied within 08 weeks from the date of this order.

 

(Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 18^th day of January 2017).

   

 

Sri. A.G.Maldar,     President.

Smt. J.S. Kajagar,    Lady Member.