Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/299/2014

Ashwini R Vasedar. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri Kedarling Ur Sou Cr Saha Ltd. Galataga. - Opp.Party(s)

V.V.Shirapnnavar

30 Jun 2017

ORDER

IN THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BELAGAVI.

Dated this 30 June 2017

1. Complaint No. 299/2014
2. Complaint No. 300/2014
3. Complaint No. 301/2014

 

Present:            1) Shri. B.V.Gudli,                     President

                        2) Smt. Sunita,                          Member

-***-

Complainant/s:

                             Sou.Ashwini Ravasaheb Vasedar,

                             Age: major, Occ: Household,

                             R/o: Mahadev Galli, Nippani, Tq.Chikkodi.

                                                C.C. No.299/14

                            

Sri.Vinayak Ravasaheb Vasedar,

                             Age: major, Occ: Household,

                             R/o: Mahadev Galli, Nippani, Tq.Chikkodi.

                                                C.C. No.300/14

 

Sri.Kiran Ravasaheb Vasedar,

                             Age: major, Occ: Household,

                             R/o: Mahadev Galli, Nippani, Tq.Chikkodi.

                                                C.C. No.300/14

 

                             (By Sri. V.V.Shripannavar, Advocate)

 

                                                          V/s.

 

Opponent/s:      

1. Shri Kedarling Urban Souhard Credit Sahakari Ltd., Galataga, Tq.Chikodi,          A/p. Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

2. Shri Kedarling Urban Souhard Credit Sahakari Ltd., Galataga, Tq.Chikodi,      Branch Office: Ashok Nagar,                    Nipani – 591237, Tq.Chikodi.

 

Represented by its Board of Directors.

 

3. Sri. Sanjay Bandu Khot,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Chairman,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

                              

4. Sri. Annasaheb Ratnappa Donage,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Vice-Chairman,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

5. Sri. Dadasaheb Sadashiv Ingale,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Director,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

6. Sri. Babu Nemanna Boke,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Director,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

7. Sri. Sidhu Beera Hirave,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Director,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

8. Sri. Ravasaheb Annappa Hulikoppe,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Director,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

9. Sri. Balagouda Bhimagouda Patil,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Director,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

10. Sou. Kamalaxi Jayappa Burge,

Age:major, Occ:Household,

Head Office- Director,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

11. Sri. Ashok Rama Yarnale,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Director,

A/p: Galataga, Tq.Chikodi.

 

12. Sri. Prakash Shivaputrappa Mirje,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Branch Office- Chairman,

                                 Ashok Nagar, Nipani, Tq.Chikodi.

 

13. Sri. Chandrakant Narasu Nimane,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Head Office- Secretary,

A/p: Khadakalat, Tq.Chikodi.

 

14. Sri. Kumar Pandurang Khot,

Age:major, Occ:Business,

Branch Office- Manager,

                                 A/p:Manuchiwadi, Tq.Chikodi.

 

(OP-1 and 3 by Sri.S.T.Kuchanure, Adv. OP.2, 4, 5, 7 to 9 and 11 by Miss.S.I.Adin Adv. OP.6-Deceased, OP.10, 13 & 14- Exparte)

              

 

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

 

 

COMMON ORDER

            I. Though the complainants are different, their grievances, allegations and the facts pleaded are same except the details of the deposits by the complainants.  In all the cases the opponents are same, as shown in the cause title. Hence for convenience all the cases are disposed of by the common order.

          II. Since there are 3 cases and different 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 case only will be shown in the cause title and the details of the deposits will be shown separately in the table.

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

          2) Inspite of service of notice O.P.10, 13 and 14 remained absent. Hence placed exparte. OP.1 and 3 appeared through their advocate and filed their objections. OP.2, 4, 5, 7 to 9 and 11 appeared through their advocate and filed their separate objections to the complaints and also produced some documents.

          3) In support of the claim in the complaints, complainants have filed their affidavits and original F.D.Rs. are produced by the complainants.   

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

          5) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant/s have proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and entitled to the reliefs sought?

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

:: R E A S O N S ::

7) On the perusal contents of the complaint/s and affidavit filed by the complainant, the complainants have deposited their amount in OP souhard as detailed below:

Sl. No.	Complaint No.	F.D.R.No.	Amount Deposited	Date of Deposits	Period	Maturity Amount/ claimed
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1	299/14	001051	20,000	06.05.02	1 year & above	55,277 upto 18.02.14
1	300/14	001050	20,000	06.05.02	1 year & above	55,277 upto 18.02.14
1	301/14	001049	20,000	06.05.02	1 year & above	55,277 upto 18.02.14

 

          8) After maturity of said F.D.Rs. the complainants approached the office of the opponent and requested the opponents for refund of the matured F.D.R/s amount, inspite of that opponent went on postponing the same by assigning one or other reasons.  Hence the opponents committed deficiency in service as contemplated under the provision of the consumer protection act 1986.

9) The OP.3 filed his objections to the complaints denying and disputing the complaints averments and further contended that, complainants have invested their deposits with Nippani branch and they have made only Chairman & Secretary of Nippani branch as party to the proceedings and all other directors of Nippani branch are not made as party to the proceedings. Further they have falsely made the alleged directors of the main branch Galataga even though since 29.09.2009 the directorship of the main branch is superseded by Karnataka State Souhard Sayukta Sahakari, Bangalore. Further, on 24.12.2008 itself the OP-3 submitted resignation to the OP society and it was accepted. Further, the Managing Director of Karnataka State Souhard Sayukta Sahakari, Bangalore had passed detailed orders on 29.09.2009 & appointed Sri.S.S.Deshmane as Administrator of OP society by dissolving managing committee of the said society. Hence for all these reasons complaints against this OP is not maintainable and prays for dismissal of the complaints with cost.

10)    The OP. 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 11 filed his objections to the complaints in the same lines as OP.3’s objections denying and disputing the complaints averments and contended that, the complainants have deposited amount in Nippani branch but instead of filing case against Nippani branch, its office bearers and its Board of Directors complainants have filed complaints against the Head Office of OP society at Galataga. These OPs are no way concerned to the alleged FDRs which are deposited at Nippani branch. There is no transaction in between complainants and these OPs. In fact there is separate and independent body registered under the relevant laws. The Chairman, Vice-Chairman & Directors of Nippani branch were holding their respective posts in OP society Nippani branch in the year 2001 i.e. at the time of alleged deposits made by the complainants and Audit has been done of the said branch in the year 2001 as per the information and deposits given by ARCS Chikodi. The transactions of collecting deposits & recovery of Galataga Branch & Nipani Branch were separate and distinct. The Chairman Sanjay Bandu Khot and Secretary, Narasu Nimane were main persons who were looking after transactions at Galataga Branch & rest are Directors of Galataga Branch. Hence for all these reasons complaints against these OPs are not maintainable and pray for dismissal of the complaints with cost.

11)    The OPs. 3, 4, 5, 7 to 9 and 11 have mainly contended and disputed the fact that, the complaints against them are not maintainable and Head office of OP society at Galataga and their Nippani Branch transactions are different and their board of directors are different. But the OPs have failed to prove the same by producing cogent evidence.

12)    On perusal of evidence affidavit of the complainants, the complainants produced original FD Receipts, they are in the name of complainants.  Inspite of service of notice O.P. 10, 13 and 14 remained absent. Hence placed exparte. During pendency of the complaint the OP.6 reported as dead. Hence case against OP.6 is abated. It is well settled legal position that non payment of the amount deposited, amounts to deficiency in service.

13) 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. have been proved.

          14) Accordingly, the following

ORDER

          The complaint/s are partly allowed. 

        The Opponents.3 to 5 and 7 to 14 as shown in the cause title are hereby jointly and severally directed and liable to pay to the complainants as order below;

Sl. No.	Complaint No.	F.D.R.No.	Amount Deposited	Date of Deposits	Period	Maturity Amount/ claimed
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1	299/14	001051	20,000	06.05.02	1 year & above	55,277 upto 18.02.14
1	300/14	001050	20,000	06.05.02	1 year & above	55,277 upto 18.02.14
1	301/14	001049	20,000	06.05.02	1 year & above	55,277 upto 18.02.14

 

The matured F.D.Rs. amount with interest mentioned in column No.7 with future interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from 18.02.2014 till realization of the entire amount.

 

          The Opponents.3 to 5 and 7 to 14 as shown in the cause title are hereby jointly and severally directed and liable to pay to the complainants a sum of Rs.3,000/- in each case towards cost of the proceedings.

         The Order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of the order.

The original order shall be kept in complaint No.299/2014 and the true copy in other clubbed cases.

 

 (Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 30 June 2017)

 

 

 

 

MSR