Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/598/2014

Sanakausar B Bagawan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chairman of Shree Bhramhanath Cr Sou Saha Nyt - Opp.Party(s)

K.R.Shaha & L.R.Attar

24 Sep 2015

ORDER

(Order dictated by Smt. Sunita, Member)

: ORDER :

          The complainant has filed complaint against Opponent U/s. 12 of C.P. Act alleging deficiency in service of non payment of the amount of matured F.D.Rs.

          2) Notice is issued against opponent, said notice is served on opponent. The opponent has appeared through his counsel and filed his written version and denied the contents of the complaint. The O.P. filed objection but as not filed affidavit.

          3) In support of the claim of the complainant, complainant has filed her affidavit by way of evidence and original F.D.R. is 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 opponents and entitled to the reliefs sought?

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

:: REASONS ::

          7) On perusal contents of the complaint and affidavit of the complainant she has stated in her complaint that her mother interested to invest her saved money in her name during her minority in some fixed deposit, details are as below;

SL.No.

FDR Nos.

Date of Deposit

Date of Maturity

Deposited

Amount

Maturity

Amount

Interest

1

2963

18/2/1993

18/2/2014

2,100/-

51,000/-

15.5%

Complainant further stated that after her majority she personally approached with her mother to the O.P. office and explained about attaining the age of majority and requested to carry out the changes in the original certificate. Now to solve the domestic financial problems. The complainant along with her mother had personally approached to the opponents and orally requested for carry out the changes and release amount deposited in the opponents society. The opponents did not heed requests of the complainant and failed to return the maturity amount in favour of the complainant. Hence she filed the complaint.

          8) On the other hand the opponent filed objection contending and denying the contents of the complainant. The O.P. all along the objection have state away denied that the complainant has approached the O.P. society and requested for carry out the changes and to release to F.D. amount. The O.P. further denied that on first week of march 2014 the complainant personally approached, but the O.Ps. admits the legal notice issued on 13/3/2014 and contended that the contents of the notice are baseless. The opponent further stated that the society is registered under Karnataka Souhard Sahakari Act and governed by the said act and the opponent managing committee has got every right and power to make variation in the interest and the same is printed on the overleaf of F.D.R. The opponents further contend that they are unable to give rate of 15.5% after maturity and on 29/5/2009 the O.Ps. society called meeting and unanimously decided to reduce the rate of interest from 15.5% to 9%. The O.Ps. also contended in his objection they are liable to pay interest at the rate of 15.5% P.A. till 30/6/2009 and at the rate of 9% P.A. from 1/7/2009 to 18/2/2014. The opponent contended that the complaint is liable to be dismissed etc.,

9) After hearing the arguments of complainant and also the O.Ps. and also after going through the written argument filed by the O.Ps. The O.Ps. have admitted to pay the interest at the rate of 9% P.A. from 1/7/2009 to 18/2/2014. It is also to be noted that the O.Ps. have denied entire contents of the complaint in their objection and also to be noted that the opponent has not filed affidavit and has straight away filed the written argument. The contention of the opponent that they are not entitled to pay the agreed rate of interest after maturity and that they are having right to make variation is printed on the back side of the F.D.R. The O.Ps. are liable to pay the interest at the rate of 15.5% from the date of deposit till the date of maturity and the amount mentioned in the matured column is Rs.51,000/- against the deposit made of Rs.2,100/-. The O.Ps. have not produced any document to show that after passing resolution in regards to the variation of interest to be paid to be complainant, that they have by any more have communicated the same to the complainant in regards to the meeting and also the resoluation passed. No doubt on the overleaf of the F.D.R. it has been mentioned that they are having rights to make changes in the interest but there is no piece of evidence comingforth to show that it is within the knowledge of the complainant that the O.Ps. have taken such steps and reduce the rate of interest. Moreover, it is to be noted that on 13/3/2014 the complainant had issued a legal notice through his counsel to the O.Ps. prior to filing of the complaint but to this legal notice the O.ps. have not replied and also it is not the case of the O.Ps. that they have through reply intimated the same that is they are entitled for 9% P.A. of interest from 1/7/2009 to 18/2/2014. Hence the contention taken by the O.Ps. cannot be believed and accepted.

10) The grievance of the complainant is that after maturity inspite of the demands made to the O.Ps. have not paid the amount. It is well settled legal position that non payment of the amount deposited, amounts to deficiency in service.

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

          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) Hence we proceed to pass the following order;

: ORDER :

          The complaint is partly allowed.

          The O.Ps. represented by the Chairman and Secretary jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.51,000/- in respect of FDR No.2968 with future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from 19/2/2014 till realization of the entire amount.

          The O.Ps. represented by the Chairman and Secretary jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.3,000/- towards costs of the proceedings.

          Order shall be complied within one month from the date of the order.

If the order is not complied within stipulated period, O.P. is 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 & then pronounced in the Open Forum on this 24th day of September 2015)

          Member                    Member                    President

gm*

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.