Kerala

Wayanad

CC/61/2012

Isys, rep by. its Managing Partner, Saline@jose saline Thomas, Pullely House, Edapetty. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, LIS DLS Project. - Opp.Party(s)

28 Apr 2012

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/61/2012
 
1. Isys, rep by. its Managing Partner, Saline@jose saline Thomas, Pullely House, Edapetty.
Kalpetta North Post,
Wayanad.
Kerala.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager, LIS DLS Project.
PK tower, near new bus stand, main road, Kalpetta.
Wayanad.
Kerala.
2. P.V. Chacko.
Managing Partner, LIS Deepasthambham Project,reg. no.1741/02,palakkal court, MG road, Cochi.
Ernakulam.
Kerala.
3. Kuriachan.
LIS Deepasthambham Project, reg No.1741/02, palakkal court, MG road, cochi.
Ernakulam.
Kerala.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE PRESIDENT
  SAJI MATHEW Member
 HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

By. Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:-

The complaint filed against the opposite parties for non refund of the deposited amount in a scheme named Deepasthambham.


 

2. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The complainant is a partnership firm deposited Rs.25,000/- in the scheme run by the opposite parties named Deepasthambham. When the scheme became matured it was re deposited for an another two years. The offer of the opposite party was that on completion of two years the amount deposited would be doubled. The complainant on reaching maturity of the deposited sum demanded the opposite party for the refund of the amount deposited with other benefits on 29.06.2009, 17.08.2010 and 14.10.2011 for the release of the deposited amount. The opposite party was not ready to refund the amount with offered benefits instead they were in the stand of evading the responsibility. There may be an Order directing the opposite party to refund the amount deposited with assured profits of double benefits for a period of each two years. If the opposite party is not in a position to give the complainant the amount assured, the deposited amount is to be refunded to the complainant with an interest at the rate of 18% along with cost and compensation of Rs.5,000/-. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs.3,860/- as commission of lottery.


 

3. The opposite parties are set as exparte.


 

4. The points that are to be decided:-


 

1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in the

non-refund of the deposited amount?

2. Relief and Cost.


 

5. Points No.1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consist of the proof affidavit of the complainant. Ext.A1 is deed of partnership in between two partners detailing objectives and way of business that to be carried out by the concern. The terms and conditions of the partnership is also detailed in this deed.


 

6. Ext.A2 is the account statement of transaction summary issued by the opposite party to the complainant. As per this document Rs.25,000/- is deposited by the concerned in the project of the opposite party, purchasing 40 units of value Rs.625/- each. The complainant has not produced any documents to substantiate the contention that the amount deposited by the concern complainant would be doubled with in a term of two years. In the absence of any adverse inferences, it is considered that the amount deposited by the concern complainant is not refunded. The non refund of the amount deposited to the complainant is a deficiency in service. The complainant is entitled for the refund of the amount with interest along with cost and compensation.


 

In the result the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) along with interest at the rate of 10% from the date of inception to the scheme till the realization of the full amount. The complainant is also entitled for the commission of the lottery that is Rs.3,860/- (Rupees Three Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Only) stated to be one by the complainant. This is to be complied by the opposite party within one month from the date of receipt of this Order.


 

Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 28th April 2012.

Date of Filing:15.02.2012.

 
 
[HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE]
PRESIDENT
 
[ SAJI MATHEW]
Member
 
[HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran]
Member

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.