BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE URBAN

    29^th DAY OF JANUARY 2022

ORDER

SRI.K.S.BILAGI, PRESIDENT

1. This is a complaint against the OP to pay amount of Rs.6,24,800/- with interest.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The complainant has invested Rs.2,00,000/- on 21.01.2016 under certificate No.159 and Rs.2,00,000/- on 13.02.2017 under certificate No.494 with OP.  The OP agreed to pay this deposited amount with interest at 10% and 12% p.a. respectively.  But, despite legal notice, OP failed to refund the deposited amount with interest.  This act of the OP amounts to deficiency of service.

3. After receipt of notice, the OP appears and files version.  OP contends that this Forum has no jurisdiction and there is no consumer dispute.  The complainant is not a consumer that the dispute raised by the complainant is out side the purview of C.P.Act.

4. There is no cause of action and complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation.  The OP is the registered finance institution, but denies to pay interest at 10% p.a.  The OP also denies its liability to pay any amount to the complainant.

5. The complainant files rejoinder for version of the OP reiterating the facts pleaded in the complaint.  The contention of the OP is not correct.  Kodandaram being Managing Director, hi wife and son being Directors are jointly and severally liable for all the transactions.  The complainant requests to reject the version of the OP.

6. The complainant files her affidavit evidence and relies on 10 documents.  The OP files affidavit evidence of its Authorized Signatory with documents.  No argument is advanced.  Perused the written arguments of the complainant.

7. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1.  Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service of the OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

8. Our answers to the above points are as under:

       Point No.1:  Affirmative in part.

      Point No.2: Affirmative in part.

      Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

9. Point Nos.1 and 2:  The OP disputes the jurisdiction of this Commission stating that there is no consumer disputes.  But, OP has not substantiate this fact either through evidence or through arguments.  Even though OP disputes agreement of payment of interest at 12% p.a.  But, receipts produced by the complainant clearly indicate that the complainant has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- for interest at 10% p.a. from 21.01.2016 with Guru Nikara Finance Corporation under receipt No.159.  Even on the complainant has produced another receipt issued by Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation.  But, the complainant has not made any claim on the basis of receipt dated 13.11.2016.  Whereas the complainant claims refund of Rs.2,00,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. on the basis of deposit made on 13.02.2017 with Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation.  The complainant has referred receipts Nos.159 and 494 only in the complaint and affidavit evidence.  Therefore, M/s Nikara Finance Corporation and Ravi Nikara Finance Corporation are nothing to do with this deposit.  The complainant has wrongly filed the complaint against M/s Nikara Finance Corporation and Ravi Nikara Finance Corporation.  Despite receipt of legal notice dated 10.11.2020, the OP namely Guru Nikara Finance Corporation and Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation failed to refund amount with agreed rate of interest.
10. The OP has filed affidavit evidence of its authorized signatory who has filed affidavit in line of version.  But this witness no where disputes the authenticating of the deposit receipts issued by Guru Nikara Finance Corporation and Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation.  When the complainant has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- under receipt No.159 and Rs.2,00,000/- under receipt No.494 with Guru Nikara Finance Corporation and Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation, the complainant is the consumer and dispute raised by the complainant is a consumer dispute.  Therefore, the OP is no right in saying that this Commission has no jurisdiction and there is no consumer dispute.  Despite maturity and despite receipt of legal notice, the OP namely Guru Nikara Finance Corporation and Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation failed to refund the deposited amount with agreed rate of interest.  This act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled to refund Rs.2,00,000/- deposited with Guru Nikara Finance Corporation with interest at 10% p.a. from 21.01.2016 and Rs.2,00,000/- deposited with Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation with interest at 12% p.a. from 13.02.2017.
11. Therefore, complaint against Nikara Finance Corporation and Ravi Nikara Finance Corporation requires to be dismissed as there is no deficiency of service on their part.  Moreover, no deposit is made with M/s Nikara Finance Corporation and Ravi Nikara Finance Corporation.
12. Point No.3:- In view of the reasons assigned above, the complainant requires to be allowed in part.  The OP namely Guru Nikara Finance Corporation is liable to pay Rs.2,00,000/- with interest at 10% p.a. from 21.01.2016 till realization and OP Chandra NIkara Finance Corporation is liable to refund Rs.2,00,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from 13.02.2017 till realization.  In addition to this, the complainant is entitled to cost of litigation Rs.10,000/-. Hence, we proceed to pass the following  

  O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part against the OP M/s Guru Nikara Finance Corporation and M/s Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation.  The complaint against M/s Nikara Finance Corporation and M/s Ravi Nikara Finance Corporation is dismissed.
2. The OP M/s Guru Nikara Finance Corporation shall refund Rs.2,00,000/- with interest at 10% p.a. from 21.01.2016 till realization and OP M/s Chandra Nikara Finance Corporation shall refund Rs.2,00,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from 13.02.2017 till realization.  Both these Finance Corporation jointly shall pay Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant.
3. The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date.
4. Furnish the copies to the parties return the documents to the parties with extra pleadings.   

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 29^th day of January, 2022)

Documents produced by the Complainant which are marked as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.10:-