Kerala

Trissur

CC/08/21

A.N.Chandramathy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sreenarayana Charitable Society, Rep By Secretary - Opp.Party(s)

V.K.Prakashan

08 Jul 2008

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
Ayyanthole , Thrissur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/21

A.N.Chandramathy
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Sreenarayana Charitable Society, Rep By Secretary
Sreenarayana Charitable Society, P.O.Madakkathara
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Padmini Sudheesh 2. Rajani P.S.

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. A.N.Chandramathy

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Sreenarayana Charitable Society, Rep By Secretary 2. Sreenarayana Charitable Society, P.O.Madakkathara

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. V.K.Prakashan

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President: The petitioner is a housewife. The respondents are Secretary and President of the Sree Narayana Charitable Society. The respondents are conducting kuries as well as accepting deposits from the public. And it was also made to believe by the respondents that they have duly been authorized by the byelaws of the society. The petitioner had deposited Rs.20,000/- as per borrowing receipt No.82 dated 6.10.99 in A/c. No.6/99 D for the interest 18% per annum. Further the petitioner had subscribed two kuries having A/c.No.248 started on 8.1.02 and also A/c. No.492 started on 15.8.99. Both the kuries had instalments of rs.100/- each. The petitioner had remitted instalments for a total sum of Rs.6500/- in both the kuries. The petitioner made request for the subscribed kuri amount which she had remitted, but the respondents promised that the kuri amount will be added to the deposited amount and the interest will be paid including the amount remitted in the kuri. When the petitioner requested the return of the amount, the respondents acknowledged the liabilities in express terms and sought time for repayment since their society is not functioning properly during those years. Consequently the petitioner together with others issued a lawyer notice to the respondent and it was duly accepted by the respondents. Even after the receipt of notice the respondents did not pay the amount or even cared to send a reply. Hence the petition. 2. Both respondent called absent and set exparte. 3. To prove the case of the petitioner, she has filed an affidavit and the documents produced by her are marked as Exts. P1 to P3. 4. Heard the Counsel. 5. According to the petitioner, she is entitled to get the entire amount deposited with 18% interest. Petitioner also prays for compensation and costs. There is no counter evidence to the evidence of the petitioner. 6. So the petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to return Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of deposit; to return the amount remitted in Ext. P3 pass book with interest at the rate of 12% for each instalment and is further directed to return the amount remitted in Ext. P1 pass book with interest at the rate of 12% for each instalment till realisation. The petitioner is entitled for Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as costs. Comply the order within two months. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 8th day of July 2008.




......................Padmini Sudheesh
......................Rajani P.S.