(Order dictated by Shri. B.V.Gudli, President)

ORDER

U/s.12 of the C.P. Act, the complainant has filed the complaint against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service of non payment of the balance in the S.B. Account.

          2) Inspite of service of notice the O.P.1 remained absent. Hence, O.P.1 placed exparte.

          3) The 2^nd O.P. in the objection denied deficiency in service contending that the complainant did not approach the O.P. and the O.P. further stated that the complaint can at any time come over to the Sahakari and withdraw the amount and directing him to come over to the Souharda Sahakari provide the K.Y.C norms and receive the amounts after providing appropriate K.Y.C norms etc., The O.P. prayed to dismiss the complaint as same is not maintainable on the point of jurisdiction. 

          4) The complainant and 2^nd O.P. have filed their affidavits and for the complainant certain documents are produced.

          5) We have heard the arguments of both learned counsel for complainant and O.P.2 and have perused the records.

          6) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. and entitled to the reliefs sought?

          7) Our finding on the point is partly in affirmative, for the following reasons.

:: R E A S O N S ::

          8) The oral and the documentary evidence on record establish that under Savings Account No. 2375 the complainant has balance of Rs. 55,089/- as on 7/10/2007 with the O.P.

          9) The grievance of the complainant is that the O.Ps. failed to pay the balance in the S.B. Account. O.P.No.2 in the objection denied the deficiency in service, contending that the complainant never approached the opponent. But the oral evidence on record and the circumstances, established that inspite of the demands made, the amount remained unpaid and hence, there is deficiency in service.

          10) The 2^nd O.P. in the objection denied deficiency in service contending that the complainant did not approach the O.P. and further stated that the complainant can at any time come over to the Souhard Sahakari and provide K.Y.C. norms and withdraw the amount.  The another contention of the O.P. is that the complainant is operating the account till today, but the S.B. Account shows the last date of operation of the account and the entry made is dated 7/10/2007 and thereafter there are no entry made in the S.B. Account. Even believing the O.P. that the complainant is operating the account till today, the O.Ps. ought to have produce statement of account to show that the complainant is operating the account as contended by the O.P. Hence, looking to the objection and affidavits filed by the both the complainant and O.P. we are the opinion that there is clear deficiency in the service on the part of the O.P. for non payment amount lying in the S.B. account of the complainant.

          11. Taking in to consideration of various aspects and the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (2011) SCCR 268 and of the Hon’ble Apex Commission reported in 2013 (2) CPR 574 as well as other subsequent decisions, absolutely it is just and necessary to impose cost on daily basis if order remains uncomplied within the period fixed for compliance of the order, so as to have feeling and pinch.

          12) Accordingly, following order.

O R D E R

          The complaint is partly allowed.

          The O.Ps. Souhard  represented by the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer as shown in the cause title are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.55,089/- jointly and severally to the complainant in S.B. Account No.2375 with interest at the rate of 6% P.A. from 8/10/2007 till realization of the entire amount.

So also, the O.Ps. Souhard represented by the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer as shown in the cause title are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant towards costs of the proceedings.

The order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of the order.

If the order is not complied within stipulated period, O.Ps. are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.50/- per day to the complainant from the date of disobedience of order, till the order is complied.

 (Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 6^th day of May 2016)

Member                Member                            President.

gm*