IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADIKERI

O R D E R

         SMT. N.R. ROOPA, MEMBER

1. This complaint is filed by the complainant against the opposite party (herein after called as opposite party) under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The complainant prays to direct the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and to award compensation of Rs.20,000/-  towards loss, mental agony and to award costs and such other reliefs as prayed in the complaint, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The brief facts of the complaint is as under;

The complainant submitted that, the opposite party is a proprietor of Broadways Industries Company.The opposite party approached the complainant and explained that the complainant to invest the amount in opposite party company for five years term which will be multiplied.As per assurance of opposite party, the complainant invested amount of Rs.50,000/- in the opposite party company for five years.The same day the opposite party issued a cheque for Rs.1,00,000/-.

3. The complainant further submits that, after completion of five years, the complainant presented the cheque for encashment through her bank.  The said cheque was returned back as bounced.  Thereafter the complainant visited to opposite party office in several times for demanded her amount.  Opposite party has failed to refund the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-.  Thereby opposite party caused the deficiency in service involving in unfair trade practice and further caused the loss and mental agony to the complainant.  Hence, the complainant has approached this commission.

4. After registration of the complaint, notice was issued to opposite party.  Inspite of service of notice opposite party remained absent without sufficient reason and cause.  Hence opposite party called out as absent and has been placed exparte.

5. In the course of enquiry into the complaint the complainant has filed affidavit evidence on her behalf and reproducing what she has stated in her complaint.  The complainant has produced documents along with complaint and she filed a memo stated that, the complainant filed a cheque bounce case against the opposite party at Civil Court, Madikeri in CC No.195/2020.  We have heard the arguments of the complainant side and we have gone through the oral and documentary evidence of the complainant scrupulously.

6. Based on the above materials, the  following points arise for our consideration;

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party if so, whether they are entitled for the relief sought for?
2. What order?

7. Our answers to the above points are as under;

• Point No.1:- Partly in the Affirmative
• Point No.2:- As per the final order for the

                       following;

R E A S O N S

8. It is the case of complainant that, the complainant to invest the amount of Rs.50,000/- in opposite party company for five years.  The same day the opposite party issued a cheque for Rs.1,00,000/-. This transaction clearly shows on seeing the documents produced by the complainant marked as Ex A1 to A3.

9. Thereafter the complainant presented the cheque for encashment through her banker Canara Bank, Madikeri Branch.  The said cheque returned back with endorsement “exceeds arrangement”.  It is also clearly shows on seeing the document produced by the complainant marked as Ex.A4.  After that the complainant filed a cheque bounce case against the opposite party at Civil Court Madikeri in CC No.195/2020.  It is clearly shows on seeing the memo filed by the complainant.  So, there is no question arise to award the cheque amount to the complainant.

10. On careful scrutiny of the case of the complainant and on the background of oral and documentary evidence, it is vivid and clear that the complainant who comes to Commission seeking compensation has proved with clean and tangible material evidence.  In this regard we come to the conclusion that, the opposite party is negligent and there is deficiency in service on their part.  Accordingly, we come to the conclusion that, the complainant is entitled for the lawful claims.  Accordingly, we answered the point No.1 partly in the affirmative.

11. Point No.2:- In the result, we proceed to pass the following

O R D E R

The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part.

2. The opposite party is directed to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- ( Rupees twenty thousand only) to the complainant.
3. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards deficiency in service and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards cost of litigation to the complainant. 
4. This order is to be complied by the opposite party within 45 days from the date of order.  Failing which the complainant is entitled for interest at 8% per annum from the date of order till payment is made on the said compensation.
5. Furnish copy of the order to the complainant and opposite party at free of cost.
6. For the non compliance of the order complainant is at liberty to file E.P under section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed, corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this 11^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2020)

   (N.R. ROOPA)         (M.S.RAMACHANDRA)      (B. NIRMALA KUMAR)

      MEMBER                    PRESIDENT                         MEMBER