Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/751/2014

Jitendra V Nalwade - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shrikant R Mali. Chairman of Aashraya Sou Cr Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

B B Madagoudar

27 Jun 2017

ORDER

IN THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BELAGAVI.

Dated this 27 June 2017

1. Complaint No. 747/2014
2. Complaint No. 748/2014
3. Complaint No. 751/2014

 

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

                        2) Smt. Sunita,                          Member

-***-

Complainant/s:

                             Kumar. Aryan Jitendra Nalawade,

                             Age: minor, Occ: student,

                             R/by his natural guardian, father

Sri.Jitendra V.Nalwade,

R/o.Shivaji Colony, Tilakawadi, Belagavi

                                                C.C. No.747/14

                            

Smt. Suchita Jitendra Nalawade,

                             Age: major, Occ: Household,

R/o.Shivaji Colony, Tilakawadi, Belagavi

                                                C.C. No.748/14

 

Sri.Jitendra V.Nalwade,

                             Age: major, Occ: Business,

R/o.Shivaji Colony, Tilakawadi, Belagavi

                                                C.C. No.751/14

                  

                             (By Sri. B.B.Madagoudra, Adv.)

 

                                                          V/s.

Opponent/s:      

                   1)      Sri.Shrikant R.Mali, Chairman,

                             Shree Aashraya Souhard Credit Society Ltd.,

                             Age: major, Occ: Business,

R/o. Shree Aashraya Souhard Credit Society Ltd.,760, Kalmath Road, Belagavi.

         

                   2)      Shree Aashraya Souhard Credit Society Ltd.,

760, Kalmath Road, Belagavi.

                             R/by its General Manager.

                  

 

                   3)      Shree Aashraya Souhard Credit Society Ltd.,

                             R/by its Branch Manager.

Shahapur Branch, Belagavi.

 

 

                             (OP.1 and 3 by Sri.S.R.Sakri, Adv. OP-2-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 his 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 amount.

          2) Upon service of notice O.Ps. 1 and 3 appeared through their counsel and filed written version & affidavit. Inspite of service of notice OP.2 remained absent. Hence placed exparte.

          3) In support of the claim in the complaints, complainants  have filed affidavits and original F.D.Rs. are produced by the complainants. Complainant/s filed written arguments in all cases.

          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 complainants, the complainants have deposited their amount in OP souhard as detailed below:

 

Sl. No.	Complaint No.	F.D.R./ SB A/c. No.	Amount Deposited	Date of Deposits	Due / maturity Date	Maturity Amount/ claimed
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1	747/14	903/32	40,000	08.06.11	08.12.16	80,000
2		389	25,000	02.09.08	02.09.14	50,000
3		390	25,000	02.09.08	02.09.14	50,000
4		464	21,000	13.05.10	13.05.16	42,000
5		461	30,000	07.04.10	07.04.16	60,000
6		436	1,100	13.08.09	13.08.15	2,200
7		443	10,000	20.11.09	20.11.15	20,000
1	748/14	462	33,000	07.04.10	07.04.16	66,000
2		428	40,000	07.05.09	07.05.15	80,000
1	751/14	429	40,000	07.05.09	07.05.15	80,000

 

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

9) The OPs.1 and 3 have filed objections to the complaints denying and disputing the complaints averments and further contended that the claims are pre matured. There is large scale differences in the signatures of the depositors. The brother of complainant was one of the Branch Manager of the society and is well aware of the situation & making false allegations regarding the complainant approaching the sahakari. There is some misappropriation of the funds and as also details there is a complaint of Department of Cooperation, wherein a statutory is being conducted and there are instruction that all depositors shall be asked to furnish KYC documents, but the complainants have not furnished the same. The General Manager & Branch Manager at Narvekar Galli had misused official stationary of OP souhard and issued fake certificates to some customers. There were also deposits of one Shivganga Multipurpose Co-Op. Shahapur, Belgaum with the sahakari & Dept. of IT had raided their society & had passed order for payment of Rs.1.15 crores & seized the accounts of OP society & as such the OP society is not able to disburse the amount to complainants. Hence prays for dismissal of the complaints with cost.

10)    The OPs on the one hand admit the deposits made by complainant/s, but contended that there is mis match of the signatures of the complainants. To prove this contention the OPs have not produced any handwriting expert opinion or filed any application before the forum to refer the disputed signatures to any handwriting expert. The OPs have taken another contention regarding mis use of official stationary and brother of complainant and officials of OPs society have created fake FDRs. It is burden on the part of OPs to prove the same by producing cogent evidence but the OPs have neither produced any evidence nor examined the alleged persons.

11)    The contention of OPs that, there were also deposits of one Shivganga Multipurpose Co-Op. Shahapur, Belgaum with the sahakari & Dept. of IT had raided their society & had passed order for payment of Rs.1.15 crores & seized the accounts of OP society & as such the OP society is not able to disburse the amount to complainants, is not tenable because, when the deposits have been accepted by complainants it is the burden on the part of OPs to refund the same. The depositors shall not suffer for the internal management of the OP society.

12)    On perusal evidence affidavit of the complainants, the complainants produced original FD Receipts, they are in the name of complainants. It is well settled legal position that non payment of the amount deposited, amounts to deficiency in service.

13)    The OPs have taken contention regarding non submission of KYC documents by the complainants to the OP Society. The OPs are at liberty to release the respective amount of complainants after receiving KYC documents from complainants.

14) 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.

          15) Accordingly, the following

ORDER

          The complaint/s are partly allowed.

          The Opponents.1 to 3 as shown in the cause title are hereby jointly and severally directed and liable to pay the complainants as order below;

Sl. No.	Complaint No.	F.D.R./ SB A/c. No.	Amount Deposited	Date of Deposits	Due / maturity Date	Maturity Amount/ claimed
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1	747/14	903/32	40,000	08.06.11	08.12.16	80,000
2		389	25,000	02.09.08	02.09.14	50,000
3		390	25,000	02.09.08	02.09.14	50,000
4		464	21,000	13.05.10	13.05.16	42,000
5		461	30,000	07.04.10	07.04.16	60,000
6		436	1,100	13.08.09	13.08.15	2,200
7		443	10,000	20.11.09	20.11.15	20,000
1	748/14	462	33,000	07.04.10	07.04.16	66,000
2		428	40,000	07.05.09	07.05.15	80,000
1	751/14	429	40,000	07.05.09	07.05.15	80,000

 

The matured F.D.Rs. amounts mentioned in column No.7 with future interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of maturity, as mentioned in column No.6 till realization of the entire amount.

          The Opponents. 1 to 3 as shown in the cause title are hereby jointly and severally directed and liable to pay 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.747/2014 and the true copy in other clubbed cases.

 

         (Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 27 June 2017)

 

 

 

 

MSR