IN THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BELAGAVI.

Dated this 19^th day of September 2016

Complaint Nos.354, 355, & 356/2015

Present:            1) Shri. B.V.Gudli,                     President

                        2) Smt.Sunita                            Member

-***-

Complainants:

                   Rameshan,

                   Age: 35years, Occ:Business & Agriculture,

                   At Post: Kalsekar galli, Desur Belagavi,

                   At present at Katagali,

Tal: Khanapur, Dist: Belagavi.

 In CC-354/2015

                   Vinod T,

                   Age: 35years, Occ:Business & Agriculture,

                   At Post: Kalsekar galli, Desur Belagavi,

                   At present at Katagali,

Tal: Khanapur, Dist: Belagavi.

In CC-355/2015

                   Pascal Fernandis,

                   Age: 35years, Occ:Business & Agriculture,

                   At Post: Majankar galli, Desur Belagavi,

                   At present Viajy Poultry form Nadihalli Road

Desur, Tal: and Dist: Belagavi.

In CC-356/2015

(By Shri. V.M.Parishwad, Advocate)

                                                          V/s.

Opponents:

1.      The Chairman,

          Krantiveer Urban Co-Op Cr. Society Ltd. Desur,

          R/o. Nandihalli Road, Kalsekar Building,

          Desur-590014.

(By Sri.S.B.Chavan, Adv.)

2.      The Secretary,

         Krantiveer Urban Co-Op Cr. Society Ltd. Desur,

          R/o. Nandihalli Road, Desur-590014.

          Tal/Dist. Belagavi.

 (O.P-2 is placed ex-parte,)

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

COMMON ORDER

            I. The complainants are different, their grievances, allegations and the facts pleaded are same except the details of the deposits by the respective complaints. In all the cases the O.P. society is same, represented by Chairman  and Secretary. Hence for convenience all the cases are disposed of by the common order.

          II. Since there are 3 cases and different complainants and   address and particulars of their deposits being different, for brevity and also for clarity and to avoid confusion, names of the parties of the particular cases only will be shown in the cause title and the details of the deposits will be shown separately in the annexure.

          1) The relevant facts of the cases are that the complainant has filed the complaints u/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in banking service of non refund of the fixed deposits/deposit.

          2) In-spite of service of notice O.P.2s. remained absent. Hence placed ex-parte. O.P.1 appeared through his counsel and filed his objections to the main petition.

          3) In support of the claim in the complaint, complainant has filed affidavit and original F.D.Rs. are produced by the complainant.

          4) We have heard the arguments 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.Ps. 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)      The complainant    has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and has stated that, out of his income he has saved  some money to see the welfare of his family in the future. He was very much interested to invest his money in some FD scheme where he can get better interest. He came contact with OPs, who explained about the scheme of FD and promised that at the nick of time or any time, they will immediately release the invested the amount with interest without any obstruction or delay. As a consequence the complainant has invested his saved money in the FD scheme with OPs as detailed below :

          8)      After maturity period on so many occasions he had demanded his amount with interest from OPs by approaching personally to the office bears of head office. The officials of the society promised to pay back principal amount with up to date interest in a short time. The OPs have paid the interest upto 31.10.2013 only and he again approached the OPs after maturity of the amount but they postponed to pay the same on one or other reasons and they failed to pay the principal amount with interest on it.

The complainant further states that in Compt No.123/2016 the complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.3 lakhs in respect of FDR No.000186 and A/c No.555 on 11/12/2012 with the OP society for a period of 1 year with rate of interest @14% P.A.

9)      After maturity the complainant approached the OPs in the 1^st week of June 2014 and requested for the encashment of said FDRs, but the OPs have informed the complainant that their society is suffering from financial emergencies & requested the complainant to come after 6 months. Accordingly the complainant approached the OPs again in the month of December 2015 & again the OPs requested to the complainant to wait for one year. Like that opponents went on postponing the same by assigning reasons. Hence opponent committed deficiency in service as contemplated under the provision of the consumer protection act 1986.

         10) Lastly fed up with the opponents behavior  he  had issued legal notice through his advocate on 15/12/2015 calling upon the opponents for the immediate release of matured FDR amount but, the O.Ps. have not received the notice and the same was returned back with an endorsement door locked. Hence opponents committed deficiency in service as contemplated under the provision of the consumer protection act 1986.

11) On perusal evidence affidavit of the complainant, after maturity of F.D.R/s. the opponents have not paid F.D.R/s. amount. Inspite of the demands made to the O.Ps. have not paid the amount. Hence, the claim of the complainant/s that inspite of the demands made the amount remained unpaid, has to be believed and accepted. Inspite of service of notice the OPs are failed to appear before the forum. Hence they have been placed as exparte. It is well settled legal position that non payment of the amount deposited, amounts to deficiency in service.

         12) Taking into consideration of the facts, evidence on record and the discussion made here before deficiency in service on the part of the O.P’s have been proved.

          13) 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.

          14) Accordingly, following order.

ORDER

          The complaints are partly allowed.

          The O.Ps. represented by the Chairman, Secretary and General Manager are hereby directed and liable to pay to the complainant/s as ordered below;

The matured F.D.R/s. amount as mentioned in column No.7 carries future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from the dates mentioned in column No.6 respectively till realization of the entire F.D.Rs. amount.

          Further, in Compt.No.123/2016, the O.Ps. represented by the Chairman, Secretary and General Manager jointly and severally are hereby directed and liable to pay the deposited amount of Rs.3 lakhs in respect of FDR No.000186 and A/c No.555, with rate of interest @14% P.A. from 11/10/2012 upto 11/10/2013 with future interest 8% P.A. from 12/10/2013 till realization of the entire FDR amount.

Further, the O.Ps. represented by the Chairman, Secretary and General Manager jointly and severally are hereby directed and liable to pay Rs.3,000/-, to the complainant towards costs of the proceedings in each complaint.

          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.

The original order shall be kept in complaint No.354/2015 and the true copy in other clubbed cases.

 (Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 19^th day of September 2016)

        Member                                        President.