The complainant deposited an amount of Rs.18,000/- by way of deposit receipt No.194 with the respondent firm. As per the receipt the complainant is entitled for interest at the rate of 14% per annum. She has received interest till December 2004. Thereafter respondents failed to pay interest. The deposited amount also not returned. Hence this complaint. 

 

            2. The averments in the counter of 2^nd respondent are that it is true that this respondent was a partner of the first respondent firm during its beginning. But he ceased to be a partner since 18.12.98 on which date the 2^nd respondent retired from the partnership firm by issuing a notice. As per the notice issued by this respondent the other partners allowed him to retire from the firm settling all his accounts and continued the partnership firm with the remaining partners. After the above date this respondent never participated in any of the activities of the firm. So he is not at all liable for any claim of the complainant. This respondent is not aware whether the complainant had deposited any amount. No cause of action is made out against this respondent, as the complainant very well knew that this respondent was no longer a partner.   The complainant is not entitled for any amount from this respondent as he was not a partner of the firm. Hence dismiss the complaint.

 

            3. The 5^th respondent filed counter stating that the address of this respondent is not fully correct. This respondent is not a partner of the said firm and the cause title as a partner is absolutely false and incorrect. The allegation that the complainant has deposited Rs.18,000/- is not true. The allegation that the respondent approached the complainant for getting fixed deposits is absolutely false. This respondent was ever made any representation before the complainant nor did complainant made any transaction with the first respondent on the basis of any promise or representation allegedly made by this respondent. The complainant is not entitled to realize any amount from this respondent. The first respondent firm became non-functional as the subscribers who had prized and auctioned the chitties did not pay the future subscriptions. It is also known that huge sum of money is due to the first respondent firm from various customers and chitty holders but those amounts were not able to be realized as the managing partner was forced to abscond as the firm became non functional and the people who are entitled to receive the money began to cause all kinds of harassment and use of force against him. The claim of compensation of Rs.2500/- is highly excessive and unreasonable and the situations available in the case do not warrant payment of compensation. Hence dismiss.

 

            4. The 6^th respondent filed counter by totally denying the averments in the complaint.

 

            5. The other respondents remained absent and set exparte.

 

            6. The points for consideration are:

(1)   Is there any deficiency in service on the part of respondents?

(2)   If so reliefs and costs.

 

            7. The evidence consists of Exts. P1 and P2 on the part of complainant and Exts. R1 to R3 on the part of 2^nd respondent. No oral evidence adduced.

 

            8. Points-1 & 2: The complaint is filed for realization of fixed deposit amount which was deposited with the respondent firm by way of fixed deposit. As per Ext. P1 on 20.1.2003 the complainant deposited Rs.18,000/- with the respondent firm. According to the complainant, she has received interest at the rate of 14% till December 2004. So in this complaint she seeks the principal amount with interest after that period. In Ext. P1 there is no rate of interest mentioned. But at the same time there is no denial on the part of respondents with regard to the rate of interest claimed by the complainant. But according to us since there is no mention of rate of interest, she is not entitled for exorbitant interest rate of 14%.

 

            9. In the counter the 2^nd respondent contended that at the relevant period of transaction he was not a partner. He stated that since 18.12.1998 the 2^nd respondent retired from the partnership by issuing a notice. He produced Exts. R1 to R3 to substantiate his contention. Ext. R2 is the photostat copy of request made by 2^nd respondent to the managing partner of respondent firm. Ext. R3 is the photostat copy of a letter issued to the managing partner of the firm by the 2^nd respondent in which it is stated that he may be permitted to retire from the partnership. These letters are not sufficient to show that he was retired from partnership firm since 18.12.1998. What is the procedure adopted by the firm by accepting the letter of 2^nd respondent is not proved by 2^nd respondent. There is not at all any evidence to show that he was retired from the partnership firm on 18.12.98. Exts. R2 and R3 are only requests. So these documents cannot be taken as retirement letters.

 

            10. The 5^th and 6^th respondents filed separate counter by totally denying the averments in the complaint. No specific case is put forward by them. The 6^th respondent filed an additional counter stating that she is not liable to answer the claim of complainant. All the respondents who are parties in the complaint are partners as per Ext. P2. There is nothing brought by the respondents to defeat the case of complainant. So the complaint is liable to be allowed.

 

            11. In the result, the complaint is allowed and all the respondents are directed to return the amount stated in Ext. P1 fixed deposit receipt with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from January 2005 till realization with costs Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the complainant within one month.