Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

cc/09/2783

Shamala. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri. Lokesh . Secretary. - Opp.Party(s)

21 Apr 2010

ORDER


BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSLAL FORUM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. cc/09/2783

Shamala.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Sri. Lokesh . Secretary.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


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

COMPLAINT FILED: 26-11-2009 DISPOSED ON: 21-04-2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 21ST APRIL 2010 PRESENT :-SRI. B.S.REDDY PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.2783/2009 COMPLAINANT Smt.Shamala, 14, LIG 2nd Stage, K.H.B.Colony, Basaveswaranagar, Bangalore – 560 079. Advocate– Smt.H.Managalamba Rao V/s. OPPOSITE PARTIES 1.Sri.Lokesh, Secretary, Vini-Vinc Souhardha Credit Co-operativeLtd., S/o.Govindarao, No.16, 80 Feet Road, Girinagar, BSK IIIrd Stage, Bangalore – 560 028. 2.Sri Srinivasa Shastry, President, S/o.GovindarajaShastry, No.50, 12th Cross, 19th Main Road, Muneswara Block, Banashankari III Stage, Bangalore-560 026. O R D E R SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA,MEMBER The complainant filed this complaint u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act of 1986 seeking direction against Opposite Party (herein after called as OP) to refund deposit amount of Rs.70,000/- and interest at the rate of 10% p.a from April’ 2005 to till the date of payment and to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- on allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The case of the complainant to be stated in brief is that:- 2. Complainant’s husband deceased Sri.Ramdurg M.C. lured away with the higher rate of interest promised by OP who are dealing in non-banking financial institution in the name and style M/s.Vinivinc Sourharda Credit Co-operative Limited, that too at the rate of 5% per month on the fixed deposit, deposited his hard earned money of Rs.40,000/- on 27-12-2004 and Rs.20,000/- on 11-01-2005 and Rs.10,000/- on 05-01-2005. Totally complainant’s husband paid Rs.70,000/- to OP from his SB account No.8349.OP acknowledged the receipt of the said amount and issued the receipts. The receipts issued by OP’s are produced. OP being a company engaged in financial dealings, reciving deposits accepted the said deposit, thereafter failed to pay the interest from the month of April’2005. The repeated request for payment of interest and seeking for refund of amount have gone in vain. On enquiry complainant’s husband came to know that OP’s one fine day has closed down its business and ran away without giving any information to the depositors. Thus complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The demand notice issued by way of Registered Post returned unserved. Complainant husband expired on 20-06-2008. The copy of the death certificate is produced. Complainant being legal heir of the deceased filed this complaint for the necessary relief. 3. On admission and registration of the complainant notice is sent to OP-1 and 2. Same are returned unserved. OP 1 & 2 refused to receive the hand summons from the Advocate of the complainant, when they were produced before the special court on 25-02-2010 complainant’s Advocate filed her affidavit to that effect. Hence service held sufficient. OP’s are placed exparte. 4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments complainant filed her affidavit evidence and produced copies of cash receipts 3Nos. and death certificate of late Ramdurg.M.C. and voter ID card of the complainant to substantiate that complainant is the wife of Late Ramdurg M.C OP did not participate in the proceedings. Then heard the complainant’s arguments. 5. It is the case of the complainant that her husband late sri.Ramdurg.M.C. lured away with a higher rate of interest promised by OPs that too at the rate of 5% per month on the fixed deposit, deposited his hard earned money of Rs.70,000/- with OP. It is not a small amount. OP acknowledged the receipt of the said amount and issued receipts. The documents to that effect are produced by the complainant. Complainant husband expired on 20-06-2008. The copy of the death certificate is produced. Voter ID card of the complainant is produced to substantiate that complainant is the wife of late Ramdurg.M.C. The complainant being the legal heir of the deceased and legally entitled to receive the amount deposited by her husband. The evidence of the complainant finds full corroboration with the contents of the above said undisputed documents. The absence of the OP leads us to draw an inference that OPs admits all the allegations made by the complainant. The OPs having accepted the huge amount of Rs.70,000/- from the complainant’s husband failed to make payment of interest or to refund the principal amount as promised The OPs having accepted the huge amount of Rs.70,000/- from the complainant’s husband and closed down their business and ran away without giving any information to the complainant’s husband. This act of the OPs leads us to draw an inference that OP has dupted the innocent complaiant’s husband thereby causing breach of trust. Having accepted the deposit OP, accrued wrongful gain to self and caused wrongful loss to the complainant’s husband for no fault of him. Non payment of interest or refund of principle amount to the complainant’s husband amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. We are satisfied that complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service. Under these circumstances we find that the complainant is entitled for refund of amount along with interest at 10% p.a. and litigation cost of Rs.1000/-. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed. OP 1 & 2 are directed to refund Rs.70,000/- together with interest at 10%p.a. from April’ 2005 till the date of realization and also pay litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication. Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 21th day of April 2010.) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT NRS