PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 30th day of November 2011
Filed on : 01-10-2011
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member. Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 524/2011
Between
K.K. Subajan, : Complainant
Kakkanattu house, (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court road,
Elangavom P.O., Muvattupuzha)
Kothamangalam.
And
T.K. Wilson, : Opposite party
Arakuzhayil house, (Absent)
Thankalam,
Kothamangalam-686 691.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The undisputed facts of the complainant’s case are as follows:
The opposite party was conducting a Jewellery shop namely Arakuzhayil Fashion Jewellery. He launched a gold purchase scheme. As per the terms and conditions of the scheme, the members of the scheme would be eligible to get gold without labour charges and labour loss. Believing the said assurances, the complainant deposited a total sum of Rs. 7,500/- on different occasions from April 1996 to May 2000. Thereafter the shop was closed and the owner left the station. Thereafter the opposite party resurfaced at Kothamangalam in January 2010. Immediately the complainant approached the opposite party and demanded the repayment of the deposited amount. He sought one year time for making repayment. Even after the lapse of the said period, no amount was paid. The complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs. 7,500/- along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from May 2000 till realization. This complaint hence.
2. Notice issued to the opposite party was returned for the reason ‘unclaimed’. Proof affidavit has been filed by the complainant. Exts. A1 and A2 were marked on his side. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
3. The points that came up for consideration are as follows:
i. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs.
7,500/- with interest from the opposite party?
ii. Whether the opposite party is liable to pay the costs of the
proceedings to the complaint.
4. Point No. i. According to the complainant he joined in the gold purchase scheme conducted by the opposite party and remitted a total sum of Rs. 7,500/-. It is contented that the opposite party not only failed to deliver the gold as agreed but also took to heels. Thereafter in January 2010 the opposite party surfaced with another business in Kothamangalam. Nothing is on record to reject the contentions of the complainant. Moreover the absence of the opposite party in this Forum speaks volumns. In the above circumstances we are of the view that the opposite party is liable to refund the amount with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization.
5. Point No. ii. The complainant even though a genuine cause as he claims so has been benumbed with the conspicuous absence of the opposite party for reasons of his own whatsoever. The complainant has not claimed compensation in all his good will which essentially compels this Forum to award an exemplary costs of Rs. 1,000/-.
6. In the result, we allow the complaint and direct as follows:
i. The opposite party shall refund Rs.7,500/- to the complainant
together with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of complaint
till realization.
ii. The opposite party shall pay Rs.1,000/- to the complainant
towards costs of the proceedings.
The above said order shall be complied with within a period
of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 30th day of November 2011.
Sd/- A Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
Appendix
Complainant’s exhibits :
Ext. A1 : Copy of statement
A2 series : Receipts
Opposite party’s Exhibits : : Nil
