Before the District consumers Forum:Kurnool
Present:Sri I.Siva Samba Murthy., B.L., President
And
Smt C.Preethi M.A., LL.B., Member
Saturday the 29th day of June, 2002
C.D.No.66/2002
D.Konda Reddy,
H.No.12-130C,
Sri Venkateswara Nagar, Kurnool. … Complainant party In Person
-Vs-
The Branch Manager,
The Peerless General Finance and Investment Company Limited,
Dwaraka Towers, 7th Roads Center, Cuddappa. …Opposite party represented by their
Counsel Sri.K.Govindu, Advocate
O R D E R
1. The complaint to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.5,250/- with interest @ 12% per annum from 02.07.2000 till the date of payment with costs of Rs.500/- and compensation of Rs.500/- for the mental agony etc.
2. The claim of the complainant is that the complainant is a subscriber of the opposite party and paid a sum of Rs.3,000/- on 02.07.2000 to the opposite party under the Social Welfare Scheme and obtained 10 years Welfare Endowment Certificate dated 05.10.1990 under the Table No.10. As per the said scheme the complainant has to pay Rs.3,000/- per year for 10 years period and the opposite party should refund Rs.52,590/- after the maturity with interest etc., but the complainant paid only one installment, but did not pay the further installments. Even then he paid Rs.3,000/- towards first installments by it should be repayable by the opposite party after expiry of 10 yeas i.e., on or after 02.07.2000 with Endowment sum and guaranteed bonus of Rs.2,250/-. The complainant is entitled to get Rs.5,250/-. He wrote letters to the opposite party, but in vain. The opposite party has not paid the amount thus committed acts of deficiency of service. Hence the complaint.
3. The opposite party having got entered appearance through an Advocate by filing Vakalath, but failed to file any objection statement, though several chances were given and none were appearing for the opposite party. Thus the opposite party allowed the matter to be proceeded against him unrepresented. As such the complainant who presses and submit the arguments reiterating the claim and prayed for decree. Thus we have he are and perused the record and proposed to dispose of the matter on merits though the opposite party did not contest.
4. The complainant has filed the relevant documents as mentioned in the complaint.
5. Therefore, the point that arises for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitled to?:-
6. It may be stated at the outset that the complainant has filed this claim seeking to direct the opposite party to refund the one installment amount paid by him namely Rs.3,000/- with accrued benefits bonus etc., after the expiry and maturity dated by 02.07.2000 totaling to a sum of Rs.5,250/-. Despite the demands of the opposite party failed to pay. The complainant has filed relevant documents and submitted orally that the scheme was ended and the necessary decree be passed against the opposite party. As the opposite party did not contest the matter the complainant has filed the relevant documents. We on careful consideration of the material made available on record satisfied the claim of the complainant is bonafide just and sustainable he is entitled for reliefs as prayed for. Thus the point is found accordingly in favour of the complainant and against the opposite party.
7. In the result, in view of our discussion made above this complaint petition is allowed in part directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.5,250/- together with interest @ 9% per annum from 02.07.2000 (the date of maturity) till the date of payment together with compensation of Rs.300/- and costs of Rs.200/- within a month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, typed to the Dictation, corrected by us, pronounced in the open Court, this the 29th day of June, 2002.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite party:- Nil
List of Exhibits marked for the complainant:- Nil
List of Exhibits marked for the opposite party:- Nil
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
