D.O.F : 26/03/2024

                                                                                                       D.O.O : 06/06/2024

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES  REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD

CC.102/2024

      Dated this, the 6^th day of June 2024

PRESENT:

SRI.KRISHNAN.K                          : PRESIDENT

SMT.BEENA.K.G                               : MEMBER

Farzana T P, aged 34 years

W/o Aboobacker Siddik

Kotta House

P/o Shiriya via Kumbla

Kasaragod

Now R/at Shreyas House,

Vidyanagar, Kasaragod

Pin – 671123.                                                                                     : Complainant                                            

   And

1. Satheesan Eliyana

Secretary

The Mangalpady-Paivalike

Urban Co- Operative Society Ltd

No. S.331, Kaikamba, P.O. Uppala,

Kasaragod, Pin – 671322.

2. Joint Registrar

Co-Operative Society

Co-Operative office,

Collectorate building, Kasaragod.                                                 : Opposite Parties

ORDER

SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER

            The brief facts of the case of the complainant is that, she had deposited an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- with opposite party wide FD receipt No. 1356 on 28/05/20220 for 2 years.  The said FD was matured on 28/05/2022.  But when the complainant approached opposite party for the amount on maturity, the opposite party evaded from payment.  The complainant approached opposite party and requested many times for the refund of the FD amount, ie, 26/07/2022, 20/08/2022, 16/09/2022 and on 22/10/2022.  Fed up with the attitude of opposite party, the complainant had given a complaint before Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Society.  But he neither solve the issue nor taken any action.  The complainant is alleging serious dereliction of duty and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party in connection with non-refund of FD amount.  The complainant was in Urgent need of money.  Due to the illegal rejection of refund of the FD amount by the opposite party, the complainant suffered huge financial loss, mental agony and hardships.  The cause of action for the complaint arose on and since 28/05/2022, the date of maturity of the FD and on subsequent failure of opposite party to repay the amount to the complainant in Mangalpady- Paivalike Urban Co-operative Society Ltd within the jurisdiction of Kasaragod Taluk and thus within the jurisdiction of this Commission.  The complainant is seeking a direction against opposite party to pay the FD amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.25% from 28/05/2020 till the payment  along with a compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/-. 

            Notice of opposite party served, name called absent, set exparte. 

            The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and the documents produced are marked as Ext. A1 and A2.  Heard the complainant.  The main questions raised for consideration are;

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service/unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party in non-refund of the FD amount on maturity?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for relief?
3. If so, what is the relief?

All issues can be discussed together.  The grievance of the complainant is that, the complainant deposited Rs. 1,00,000/- for 2 years, and on maturity of the FD, the opposite party was not ready to refund the amount even after several request from the complainant, and the complainant was in urgent need of money.  The complainant has produced Ext. A1 and A2 to prove the deposit with opposite party, and her efforts to collect the amount from opposite party.  Ext. A1 is the fixed deposit receipt dated 28/05/2020 for Rs. 1,00,000/- and Ext. A2 is the receipt issued from Joint Registrar Co-operative Kasaragod.  The opposite party is liable for the monitory loss and hardships undergone by the complainant due to their deficiency in service.  Withholding the FD amount after maturity amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  Therefore opposite party is bound to refund the matured amount with interest along with compensation at the earliest. 

The prayer of the complainant is to refund Rs. 1,00,000/- with offered interest  of 7.25% along with compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/-.  But the complainant has not submitted any evidence for such a huge damage.  Hence this commission holds that an amount of Rs. 25,000/- is a reasonable compensation in this case. 

Therefore, the complaint is partly allowed directing opposite party to refund Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with 7.25% interest from 28/05/2020 till payment along with a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  The complainant is also entitled for Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as litigation cost in this case. 

    Sd/-                                                                                                        Sd/-

MEMBER                                                                                                      PRESIDENT

Exhibits

A1 – Fixed deposit receipt

A2 – Receipt issued from Joint Registrar Co-operative Kasaragod

     Sd/-                                                                                                                   Sd/-

MEMBER                                                                                                      PRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order

                                                                                    Assistant Registrar

JJ/