Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/37/2014

Tukaram A Toraskar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chairman, Bharati Mahila Credit Souharad Sahakari Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

A M Khot

15 Sep 2015

ORDER

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

ORDER

          U/s.12 of the C.P. Act, complainants have filed the complaint against the O.P. alleging deficiency in service of non payment of the amount of the matured F.D.R.

          2) After service of notice O.P.No.1 failed to appear before the Forum. Hence O.P.No.1 is placed exparte. O.P.No.2 appeared through advocate and filed his written version.

          3) In support of the claim in the complaint, complainants have filed their affidavit and original F.D.R., death certificate of mother of complainant and legal heirs certificate issued by Tahsildar, Nipani, is produced by the complainant.

          4) We have heard the argument of the complainant counsel and perused the records.

          5) 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?

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

:: R E A S O N S ::

          7) On perusal contents of the complaint and affidavit filed by the complainants. The complainants have stated in their complaint as well as affidavit that, complainants late mother Smt. Sulochana Annappa Toraskar had invested the amount in the opponents society in the form of fixed deposit during her life time. The fixed deposit made by the mother of the complainants are as under;

Sl. No.	Date of F.D.	F.D. Amount	F.D.R.No.	Date of maturity	Rate of Interest
1	17/8/2005	30,000/-	10951	17/8/2010	10%

 

          The said F.D. amount deposited by mother of the complainants, amount is matured long back. The complainants mother already expired leaving behind complainants as her only legal heirs and as such complainants are entitled to get the said F.D. amount. The complainants had requested to opponent to return the F.D. amount and alongwith accrued interest in their favour. But opponent postponing the same by assigning one or other reasons. Inspite of repeated request of complainants, opponents have failed to return the said F.D. amount. Hence complainant had filed complaint No.205/2013 before this forum for return of the said F.D. amount along with accrued interest in the said complaint, the complainant No.2 and 3 have filed their affidavit stated that, they have no objection to pay F.D. amount and interest thereon to the complainant No.1. However, after hearing, this Forum had passed an order on 2/1/2014 and dismissed the complaint by giving liberty to the complainants to file fresh complaint in accordance with law. Hence the complainants have filed this fresh complaint by arraying all the legal heirs of the deceased mother.

8) On perusal original F.D.R.No.10951 dated 17/8/2005 amount of Rs.30,000/- it is standing in the name of deceased mother complainants. Said F.D. was matured on 17/8/2010 on perusal death certificate issued by Deputy Tahsildar, Nipani, the mother of the complainant Smt. Sulochana Annappa Toraskar was died on 4/9/2010. On perusal legal heir certificate issued by Deputy Tahsildar, Nipani in favour of the complainants. The complainants are the legal heirs of the deceased Smt. Sulochana Annappa Toraskar. They are entitled matured F.D. amount as a legal heirs of the deceased Smt. Sulochana Annappa Toraskar.

9) On perusal contents of the objection filed by the O.P.No.2. O.P.2 has admitted the mother of the complainants had invested amounts in the fixed deposit during her life time and she had deposit Rs.30,000/- under F.D.R. No.10951 and date of maturity was 17/8/2010.

10) The complainants further alleged that, inspite of the demands made to the O.Ps. have not paid the F.D. amount including accrued interest in their favour. Inspite of issuance of notice the opponents failed to pay the F.D.R. amount in their favour. The complainants proved and established that, their deceased mother Smt. Sulochana Annappa Toraskar had deposited amount of Rs.30,000/- in the opponents society. The complainants are legal heir of the deceased Smt. Sulochana Annappa Toraskar.

11)    On perusal contents of the affidavit and documents produced by the complainants and facts clearly established that opponents act amounts to deficiency in service. Complainants have proved their case.  

          12) 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.

          13) Accordingly, following order.

ORDER

          The complaint is partly allowed.

          The O.P.No.1 and 2 are hereby directed to pay a sum of matured amount of Rs.30,000/- in respect of F.D.R. No.10951 to the complainants with interest at the rate of 10% P.A. till 17/8/2010 and future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from 18/8/2010 till realization of the entire amount.

          Further, The O.P. No.1 and 2 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- 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: 15^th day of September 2015)

Member                    Member                                President.

gm*