Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/10/58

Shankari - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary, North Malabar Madhya Vyavasa Thozilali Kshema Co-op Society - Opp.Party(s)

30 Oct 2010

ORDER


C.D.R.F, KasargodDISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, OLD SP OFFICE BUILDING, PULIKUNNU, KASARAGOD
CONSUMER CASE NO. 10 of 58
1. ShankariW/o.Rajan, Thumballil Veedu, Udayapuram, Mandapam.Po.Chittarikkal.Via.KasaragodKerala ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. Secretary, North Malabar Madhya Vyavasa Thozilali Kshema Co-op SocietyKanhangad. 671 315KasaragodKerala ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :
For the Respondent :

Dated : 30 Oct 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

D.o.F:27/8/2009

D.o.O:30/10/2010

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                             CC.NO. 58/10

                     Dated this, the 30th   day of October  2010

PRESENT:

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                               : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                          : MEMBER

 

Sankari, W/o Rajan,

Thumballil House,Udayapuram,

Mandapam Po,  Chittarikkal.                   : Complainant

(In person)

 

Secretary,  North Malabar Madya

Vyavasaya Thozhilali Ksheme

 Co-op Society,Kanhangad                        : Opposite party

(Adv.A.Gangadharan,Hosdurg)

 

                                                                ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ       : PRESIDENT

    The gist of the complaint is as follows:

   Complainant deposited  ` 21000/- that she received as compensation in the name of her daughter Shyla and Shyni on 8/2/1992.  The deposit was for a period of 10 years at an interest rate of  15.5% per annum .  Accordingly upto 25/10/1999  the  interest for the said amount has been credited in the SB account held by complainant.  Thereafter, in 2006 when she approached  the society to take back the amount the society was ceased  functioning  and it was told her that since a number of members  are to repay the amount availed as loan the  payment  will be  made within 6 months.  But when she approached in 2006 with her daughters she was asked to   wait a further period of one year and till date neither the amount nor the interest is repaid.  Hence the complaint.

2.   According to opposite party, complaint is baseless and not sustainable.      The amount  of  ` 21000/- deposited is not obtained by way of compensation.  It was the amount paid by the members of Kannur District Arrack & Toddy shop workers Union by way of their contribution.  The opposite party society was formed by the members of the Kannur District Arrack & Toddy shop workers Union for the welfare of  arrack workers in Kasaragod District.  On account of arrack  ban in 1995 all the workers working in  various arrack shops were become jobless and they were put to financial strain.  The society is entitled to get more than 15 lakhs rupees from various loanees.  But nobody is able to pay any amount inspite of coercive steps.  The opposite party society is in liquidation stage.  There is no staff for the society.  The signatory to the version is the former secretary of the society. Practically the society is now not in existence.  The complaint is filed in a belated stage.  Even as per complaint she failed to receive the interest since 1999.  The dispute mentioned is not a consumer dispute and the remedy available is to approach the arbitrator appointed under the Co-op societies Act.  The Forum lacks  jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

3.   Complainant examined as PW1  and Exts.A1&A2 marked.  No oral evidence adduced by opposite  party.  Both sides heard.  Documents verified.

4.   Ext.A1 is the copy of the deposit receipt.  As per that ` 21000/- is deposited on 8/2/1992.  The deposit  is in the name of Shaila and Shyni.

5.     In our view  the complaint is not maintainable on  two grounds.

        The maturity date of the deposit was on  8/2/2002.  When the maturity  date is shown on a deposit receipt the limitation for the  complaint runs from that date.  Therefore, as per Consumer Protection Act the complaint ought to have been filed within 2 years from the date of maturity shown in the deposit receipt.  The Hon’ble Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the case of V.P.Davis  Vs. Karuna Trust reported in 2001(2)CPR 261 has held that cause of action in a case of deposit made in a financial institution could accrue only from the date of demand unless there is maturity date is mentioned.  In this case the maturity date is 18/2/2002.  So the complaint ought to have been filed on or before 17/2/2004.  But the complaint is filed on 17/3/2010 ie after 6 years.  Hence the complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation.

6.   The complaint is not maintainable on yet another ground also.  The complaint is seen filed by Sankari who is neither the depositor nor the authorized agent of the depositors.  Hence the complaint ought to have been filed by the depositors themselves.  The present complainant Sankari has no locus standi  to file this complaint on behalf of her daughters  who attained maturity. 

   Therefore, the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable without  any order as to costs.

 

Exts.A1- copy of deposit receipt.

A2-copy of savings bank A/c

Sd/                        Sd/

MEMBER                                                                                  PRESIDENT

eva/                        /Forwarded by Order/

 

                                                 SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT

 


, , ,