Complaints filed on: 04-03-2024
Disposed on: 13-09-2024
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU
+
DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
::P R E S E N T::
SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, B.Com, L.L.M, ….....PRESIDENT
SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., L.L.B. (Spl).,.. .LADY MEMBER
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 39/2024
Smt. Pramila K.N, W/o. Jagannath K.S.
No.495, Sri. Lakshmi Venkateshwara Nilaya,
6th A Cross, Gubbi Veeranna Road, SIT Extension,
Tumkuru-572103 …….Complainant
(Party in person,)
V/s
1.SRI VALMIKA SOUHARD CO-OPERATIVE LTD,
Above Uppena Kolaga Okkaliga Vidyarthi Nilaya,
SIT ExtensionMain Road,
Tumakuru-572103.
2.Sri.G.Ramanjanya,
President
SRI VALMIKA SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVE LTD,
Above Uppena Kolaga Okkaliga Vidyarthi Nilaya,
SIT ExtensionMain Road, Tumakuru-572103.
3.Smt.Bhavya,
Chief Executive Officer,
SRI VALMIKA SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVE LTD,
Above Uppena Kolaga Okkaliga Vidyarthi Nilaya,
SIT ExtensionMain Road, Tumakuru-572103.
(Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, Sri. B.S.Yogeesh, Advocate.)
::O R D E R ::
SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, LADY MEMBER
This complaint filed by the complainant Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties to direct them to pay Rs.6,00,000-00 to the complainant.
2. The Opposite Party No.1 is Sri. Valmika Souharda Co-Operative Ltd, Tumkuru (herein after called as OP.No.1) Opposite Party No.2 is the President of the OP.No.1 (herein after called as OPNo.2) and Opposite Party No.3 is the Chief Executive Officer of the OP.No.1 (herein after called as OP.No.3).
3. The case of the complainant is that, the complainant is resident of Tumkuru has deposited an amount in fixed deposit account on 11th May 2017 and it’s FD receipt No. is 175. The maturity amount/value of the said FD receipt is Rs.5,99,795-00 and the maturity date is 11th August 2024. The complainant was requested the OP.No.2 and 3 to release the pre maturity amount of the above said FD receipt, but the OP.No.2 and 3 were denied for payment due to shortage of funds and on 20th July 2023, OP.No.2 and 3 were requested the complainant to wait for some days for arrangement of funds. Though the complainant issued the legal notice to the OPs, the OPs have not paid the value of pre mature fixed deposit amount of the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
4. After issuing of notice by this Commission, the OP No. 1 to 3 were appeared before this Commission through their counsel and filed common version.
5. In the version, the OPs No.1 to 3 are admitted about the FD (Fixed Deposit) bond, its maturity date and maturity amount. But denied all other allegation made by the complainant as false. Further OP No. 1 to 3 is submitted that, due to pandemic disease of Covid-19 as the recovery of the amount was little paralyzed, it is therefore OPs requested the complainant to claim the amount on the maturity date on the bond, except that there is no negligence or poor service rendered by the OPs. Further OPs have submitted that the OPs Society is registered under Karnataka Souhardha Sahakari Act 1997. Therefore any dispute or claim arise shall be made before the Souhardha Federation Court and this complainant is not maintainable before this Hon’ble Commission. Hence OP No.1 and 3 are prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
6. The complainant has filed her affidavit evidence with 3 (three) documents, which are marked as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3. OP No.2 has filed his affidavit evidence.
7. We have heard complainant in person and counsel for OPs with written arguments of the OPs and points would arise for determination as follows:
- Whether the complainant proves deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1 to 3?
- Is complainant is entitled to the relief sought for?
- Our findings on the aforesaid points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative.
Point No.2: As per final order for the below
:R E A S O N S:
Point No.1 &2 :-
9. The complainant has argued that, she has deposited an amount of Rs.2,50,000-00 in the fixed deposit account in the OP.No.1 Sahakari Niyamitha. The OP 1 to 3 are also admitted the same. Ex.C-1/copy of the FD bond reflecting that name of the complainant, receipt No.175, amount 2,50,000-00, accepted date:11-05-2017, maturity date:11-05-2020. Further Ex.C-1A establishing that, same (Ex.C-1) was renewed from 19-08-2020 to 11-08-2021 and from 16-08-2021 to 11-08-2024 and maturity amount on 11-08-2024 is Rs.5,99,795-00. Further Ex.C-1 is establishing that, it is signed by the OP.No.2 and 3. Further the complainant has submitted that, she has requested the OP.No.2 and 3 for pre maturity value of the above FD amount, but was denied by the OP No.2 and 3 for payment due to shortage of finds and OPs requested with the complainant to wait for some days for arrangements of funds. Further the complainant has contended that, though the complainant issued a notice to the OPs on 03-02-2024. The OP No.1 to 3 have not paid the pre matured FD amount of the complainant. Ex.C-2/copy of the postal acknowledgement and Ex.C-3/copy of the notice issued by the complainant establishes the above argument of the complainant.
10. Counsel for the OP No.1 to 3 has argued that, the complaint is not maintainable before this Hon’ble Commission. In view of the OP Society is registered under Karnataka Souhardha Sahakari Act 1997. Therefore any dispute or claim arise, shall be made before the Souhardha Federation Court. But Hon’ble National Consumer Commission, New Delhi, in Revision Petition No.823 to 826 of 2021 between Smt. Kalawati and Others V/s. M/s. United Vaish Co-Operative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd, it is held that, “with reference to Section 2(1)(d) of CPA that where a company or a firm invites deposits from the public for the purpose of using money for its business or promise of giving attractive rates of interest with security of investment and prompt repayment of the principle after stipulated term the transaction of such a nature would clearly make the depositor a ‘Consumer’ under CPA’. Further Section 100 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 contemplates that, Act not in derogation of any other law. The provision of the Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Considering this provisions and decision of the Hon’ble National Consumer Commission, New Delhi, we hold that, the complaint filed by the complainant before this commission is maintainable.
11. Further counsel for the OP No.1 to 3 has contended that, the complainant has claimed Rs.6,00,000-00, but the maturity value is Rs.5,99,795-00 as on maturity date i.e., 11-08-2024. Ex.C-1A produced by the complainant is establishing the same. Further counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3 has submitted that, the complainant has claimed the matured FD amount before the maturity date i.e., 11-08-2024. Therefore the complainant is eligible to get the pre maturity value less the 2% which is accrued amount of Rs.5,63,252-00. In the time of argument, the complainant also agreed that she has claimed the accrued FD amount before maturity and also agreed to receive the pre maturity amount with less 2%. Further counsel for the OP No.1 to 3 has argued that the interest on the principle amount was already paid to the complainant by crediting it to her SB account in the OP Society. To prove the same, the OP No.1 to 3 have produced copy of the statement of accounts pertaining to the complainant. The same document is reflecting the name of the complaint, Head SB Account No.101050000023, address of the complainant. Further the statement of SB Account pertaining to the complainant reflecting the transactions from 31-01-2023 to 04-07-2023 and OP Society was deposited an interest amount of Rs.35,161-00 in the SB account of the complainant. The complainant also admitted that the OP No.1 to 3 were deposited the interest amount to the SB account of the complainant. Further counsel for the OP No.1 to 3 has argued that, due to pandemic disease of Covid-19, the recovery of the amount was little paralyzed, it is therefore the OPs have requested the complainant to claim the amount on the maturity date of the bond. But it is the duty of the OP No.1 to 3 to release/pay the deposited amount, which is the hard earned money of their customer when they want to withdraw the amount. The OP No.1 to 3 were not released/paid the fixed deposited amount with premature value when the complainant requested to withdraw the amount. This act of the OP No.1 to 3 is amounts to deficiency in service on the OP. No.1 to 3. Therefore the OP. No.1 to 3 are liable to pay premature value of FD amount i.e. Rs.5,63,252-00 (Five Lakhs Sixty Three Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Two rupees only)to the complainant with interest @ 8% p.a. from date of the complaint i.e., 04-03-2024 to till realization. Further the OPs No.1 3 are compelled the complainant to approach this commission. Therefore the OP. No.1 to 3 shall liable to pay litigation cost of Rs.6,000-00 (six thousand only) and compensation of Rs.6,000-00 (six thousand only) to the complainant. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following:-
:O R D E R:
The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part.
It is directed that the OP. No.1 to 3 jointly and severally shall pay Rs.5,63,252-00 to the complainant with interest @ 8%p.a. from the date of complaint i.e., 04-03-2024 to till realization.
Further it is directed that the OPs No.1 to 3are jointly and severally to pay compensation of Rs.6,000-00 and litigation cost of Rs.6,000-00 to the complainant.
Further it is also directed that the OP No.1 to 3 shall comply the above order within the 45 days from the date of receipt/knowledge of the above order.
Furnish copy of this order to both parties free of costs immediately.
