IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Tuesday, the 31st day of October, 2017
Filed on 22..10..2016
Present
1) Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2) Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3) Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.338/2016
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Santhosh 1. SNDP Sakha Yogam Br. No. 363
S/o Hariharan Kakkazham, Neerkkunnam P.O.
Lakshmiyil Alappuzha, (Represented by its Receiver)
Arattuvazhi Ward
Kanjiramchira Muri 2. Sri.P.G.Babu
Alappuzha (President, SNDP Sakha Yogam
(By Adv. C. Parameswaran) Branch No. 363, Thayamkari Veedu
Kopparakadavu, Kakkazham
Alappuzha
3. Sri.K.Bhaskaran
(Secretary, SNDP Sakha Yogam
Branch No. 363, Anaveli House
Neerkkunnam, Alappuzha.
4. Sri.N.K.Premanadan
Secretary, Ambalappuzha
Taluk, SNDP Union
Kidanganparambu, Alappuzha
(By Adv. V.S. Karthikeyan)
5. Sri.V. K. Nateshan
General Secretary
Aruvippuram, SNDP No.2
Kollam -01
O R D E R
SRI. ANTONY XAVIER (MEMBER)
The complainant has filed this complaint before the Forum on 22..10..2016 alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The brief facts of the allegations of the complainant are as follows:-
By the specific assurance of the opposite parties the complainant had deposited a total sum of Rs. 2,07,250/- before the Sakhayogam on different dates and opposite parties issued pass book to the complainant. They had paid interest till 28.09.2006 and thereafter the opposite parties failed to pay the interest or deposited amount till date, even though he had requested to return the amount. Since there was no positive steps to return the amount he filed this complaint seeking relief.
2. Notices were issued to the opposite parties 1 to 3, they did not appear before the Forum hence they are set ex-parte by this Forum. The 4th opposite party filed version.
3. The version of the 4th opposite party is as follows:-
The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. All the averments in the complaint are denied. The complainant is not a consumer of the 4th opposite party. There is no privity of contract between the complainant and the 4th opposite party. In fact there is no knowledge about the transaction alleged in the complaint. The complaint is only filed as an experiment and there is no bonafides. The complaint does not reveal any cause of action against the 4th opposite party. The 4th opposite party is unnecessarily impleaded in the complaint. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the 4th opposite party.
4. Considering all the allegations of the complainant and the 4th opposite party, this Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service and negligence on the part of
the opposite parties in repayment of fixed deposit to the complainant?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation and cost from the
opposite parties?
5. Point No. 1 & 2:- Complainant has filed proof affidavit and produced 1 document in evidence and it marked as Ext.A1. Exts.A1 is the original pass book issued by the opposite parties to the complainant at the time of depositing the amount. It shows that the deposited amount, interest paid etc.
6. On a careful study of the entire matter of this case and verification of the documents, it can be seen that as per the assurance given by the opposite parties the complainant had deposited the total amount of Rs. 2,07,250/- before the Sakhayogam administered by the opposite parties. The pass book issued by the opposite parties shows that the opposite parties had paid some interest to the complainant for a certain period, for the said deposited amount. Since the opposite parties had defaulted payment of interest, the complainant requested the opposite parties to return the amount with interest. But the opposite parties have not shown any earnest effort to take proper steps to return the same. This will amounts to cheating. The entire action on the part of the opposite parties shows the deficiency in service and negligence in re-payment of deposited amount with interest to the complainant in time. There is no justification on the part of the opposite parties in retaining the amount with interest which is payable to the complainant. The action of the opposite parties are highly illegal and arbitrary and without any bonafides. The complainant is fully entitled to get back the deposited amount with interest from the opposite parties. Since there is deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the opposite parties by way of purposeful denial of repayment of amount to the complainant, he is entitled to get compensation and costs from the opposite parties and that the opposite parties are jointly and severely liable for that. Considering the whole aspects of this case and after verification of the documents, we are fully convinced that the allegations put forward by the complainant against the opposite parties are highly genuine. So, the complaint is to be allowed. All the issues are found in favour of the complainant.
In the result, complaint allowed . The opposite parties 1 to 3 return the deposit amount of Rs. 2,.07,250/-(Rupees One lakh and fifty thousand only) to the complainant along with 9% interest per annum from 29-09-2006 till the date of repayment of the entire amount to the complainant and pay a compensation of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) to the complainant for his mental agony, pain, sufferings, inconvenience and loss due to the grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties by way of purposeful refusal to return back the deposited amount amounts interest in time to the complainant and further pay a sum of Rs. 1000/-(Rupees One Thousand only) as cost of proceedings we further direct the opposite parties to pay the above said amounts to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the 31st day of October, 2017.
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
APPENDIX:-
Evidence of the Complainant:-
Ext. A1 - Original pass book
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil.
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F
Typed by:- Br/-
Compared by:-
