Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/116/2015

Manjunath S Shirodkar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chairman Shree Aashraya Sou Cr Scty Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Prashant P Samaji

28 Apr 2017

ORDER

                 

ADDITIONAL  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BELAGAVI

C.C.No.116 & 117/2015

                     Date of filing: 25/02/2015

                                                                  Date of disposal: 28/04/2017

P R E S E N T :-

 

	(1)	Shri. A.G.Maldar, B.Com,LL.B. (Spl.) President.
	(2)	Smt.J.S. Kajagar, B.Sc. LLB. (Spl.)  Lady Member.

 

 

COMPLAINT NO.116 & 117/2015

 

 

COMPLAINANT   -

Shri.Manjunath S/o Shankar Shirodkar, Age : 63 Years, Occ : Business, R/o : H.No.1161, Saraf Galli, Shahapur, Belagavi.                       (Rep. by Shri.P.P.Samaji, Adv.)

 

 

 

- V/S -

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES  -

1.         2.       3.

The Chairman, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., Off. At: 760, Kalmath Road, Belgaum.   The Director, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., Off. At: 760, Kalmath Road, Belgaum.   The Branch Manager, Shahapur Branch, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., Off. At: Dane Galli, Shahapur,Belgaum.                (Rep. by Shri. S. R. Sakri, Adv. for               Op.No.1 & 3 and Op.No.2 Ex-parte)

By  Smt.J.S. Kajagar, Member.

 

COMMON JUDGEMENT

 

 

1.      The above complaints have been filed by the complainants under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after referred to as Act) against the Opposite Parties (in short the “Ops”) directing them to pay the F.D. matured amounts as per the respective F.D. receipts with interest from the date of maturity and compensation of Rs.20,000/- each of the complainant towards the damages and any other reliefs deemed fit under the circumstances of the cases.

 

2.      Since the common question of law and facts involved in these two complaints, they were taken-up together for disposal by the Common Judgments by this Forum.

 

          The brief facts leading to these two complaints are that,

 

The case of the complainants are that, the complainants are customer of the OPs Society and as such the complainants have kept fixed deposits with OPs society on various dates of the respective Complaints. The details of amounts deposited as shown below:-

IN COMPLAINT NO.116/2015

 

 

Sl. No	A/c No.	Date of Dept.	Deposit Amount	R.O.I	Maturity Date	Maturity Amount
01	3159/31	12/12/12	50000/-	11%	01.03.14	56690/-
02	3160/31	21/12/12	41332/-	11%	01.03.14	47124/-
03	3161/31	05/09/13	50000/-	10%	01.03.14	52425/-
04	3162/31	05/09/13	50000/-	10%	01.03.14	52425/-
05	3163/31	06/10/13	15600/-	10%	01.03.14	16224/-
06	3164/31	21/11/12	49598/-	11%	01.03.14	56549/-
07	3165/31	09/04/12	50000/-	11%	01.04.14	60412/-

 

 

IN COMPLAINT NO.117/2015

 

Sl. No	A/c No.	Date of Dept.	Deposit Amount	R.O.I	Maturity Date	Maturity Amount
01	150	08/01/10	50000/-	13.20%	08.01.14	50000/-
02	172	27/04/10	50000/-	13.20%	27.04.14	50000/-

 

 

It is further complainants contended that, after the maturity of respective F.D. amounts, the complainants have requested the OPs to refund the above said matured F.Ds. amount, but even after maturity of the said period, the OPs avoided to make payments by giving one or the other reasons. Inspite of repeated request, the OPs failed to refund the matured F.Ds. amount and it is obligatory on the part of the OPs to refund the above said F.D. amounts to the complainants and thereby OPs committed the deficiency of service as contemplated under the provision of C.P. Act 1986.

 

          It is also further complainants contended that, due to persistent refusal of the OP.No.3 to refund the FDs amounts, the complainants have approached and requested to the Ops in first week of August 2014 to make payment of the above said deposits, but Ops could not heed the requests of the complainants. Finally the complainants have got issued legal notices to the OPs through their Counsel on dtd: 30.01.2015 and notices were duly served to the OPs. But, the OPs have neither replied nor complied with said notices. However, the OPs refused to return the fixed deposited amounts by giving one or other reasons, hence, the complainants have constrained to file these complaints.  

 

3.      After issue of notice to the Opponents. The Op.No.1, has appeared through his Counsel and resisted the claim of the complainants by filing his written version and Op.No.3 has filed memo stating that, the written version of Op.No.1 adopt the same and the Op.No.2 has neither appeared nor filed any version before this Forum. The Hon’ble Forum consider the OP.No.2 is placed
Ex-parte.

 

The OP.No.1 & 3 further contended in the written version that, the main contention of the OP is that, the complainants have not approached to the Sahakari/society and not furnished the KYC norms as required under law to claim the benefits under the I.T. Deductions and the complainants are not entitle for the interest as agreed in the complaints and therefore, the OP prayed to dismiss the complaints.

 

 4.     The Complainants have filed their affidavits in support of their claim and produced Original F.D. Receipts, Copy of legal notices, Postal Receipts and Acknowledgements, for sake of our conveniences, we have marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-4. On the other hand, the OP.No.1 has filed his affidavit and not produced any documents. The Adv. for complainants have filed their written arguments and heard the argument on both sides.

 

Now, the following points that arise for our consideration in deciding the cases are;

 

01.Whether the complainants have prove that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs for not settling/refunding the payment of F.D. amount?

 

02. What order?

 

 

 

 

 

5.      Our findings on the above points are as fallow;

 

 

01. Point No.1  in the Affirmative.

02. As per final Order.

 

 

 

 

R E A S O N S :-

 

 

6.      Point No.1:  We have gone through the pleadings, evidence of complainants and as well as documents on records. It is admitted fact that, the complainants are customer of the Ops society. The Ops society have issued F.D. receipts to the complainants, the said documents of Original F.D. receipts were marked as Ex.P-1. Further, the case of the complainants are that, several times approached to the OPs society and requested to refund the F.Ds. amounts, but the Opponents society failed to pay the matured F.Ds. amount. Inspite of receipt of notice, the opponents have not bothered to refund the complainants F.Ds. matured amount, these acts of the Ops, it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Ops.

 

The main contention of the Op.No.1 is that, the complainants have not approached to the society and not furnished the KYC norms as required under law to claim the benefits under the I.T. Deductions and the complainants are not entitle for the interest as agreed. For that proposition, the OP.No.1 has not produced any cogent and material evidence and document to hold that, the complainants have not approached to the OP society. Therefore, the OP.No.1 has failed to establish as stated in the written version. Therefore, the contention of the OP.No.1 cannot be hold good and it is not acceptable.

 

Moreover, the above said F.Ds. amounts have not been denied by the OP.No.1 except the contents taken in the written version, as to KYC norms and interest. Therefore, in our considered view that, on perusal of the contents of the affidavit evidence and documents produced by the complainants and notices were issued by the complainants through their counsel, the said notices are duly served on the Ops. In-spite of service of notices, the OPs failed to reply to the said notices and failed to refund the above said F.Ds amount as well as interest to the complainants. The OPs violated the terms of the contract to pay interest as promised to the complainants, it amounts to deficiency in service as contemplated under the provisions of C.P. Act 1986.

 

It is a duty of the OPs that, after the maturity of F.Ds. amount a mandatory duty on the part of OPs to disburse or settle the F.Ds. amount, The F.Ds. which were fixed by the complainants in Ops society, but the OPs failed to pay F.Ds. maturity amount and one or the other reason dragging and alleging untenable contention, is amounts to deficiency of service on the part of OPs.

 

When, the OPs Society not refunding the respective F.Ds. maturity amount to the complainants, even after completion period of maturity, it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Ops. For that proposition, we would like to relied a decision of Hon’ble Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai reported in 2010 (1) CPR 62. It has been held that, non-refund of maturity of F.D. amount, it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Ops attracting Sec.2(1) (g) of C.P. Act 1986. Therefore, the complainants are entitled to receive the respective F.D. maturity amount as per the F.D. receipts with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of maturity till realization.  Hence, due to non-payment of F.Ds. matured amount by the OPs is caused mental agony and harassment to the complainants. In our considered view that, it is just and proper to award a compensation of Rs.2,000/- each of the complainant for inconvenience and mental agony. Added to this we also award litigation expenses of Rs.1,000/- to the each of the complainant. Hence, we answer to Point No.1 in affirmative. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following;

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

O R D E R

 

For the reason discuss above, the complaint filed by the complainants U/s 12 of the C.P. Act – 1986 in Complaint Nos.116/2015 and 117/2015 are here by partly allowed with costs.

 

 

The OP.No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay the respective F.Ds maturity amounts as agreed rate of interest and further the OP.No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of maturity till realization to the complainants. 

 

 

The OP.No.1 to 3 also hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- and Rs.1,000/- towards cost of each complainant within 10 weeks from the date of this order, failing to which liable to pay Addition interest @ 2 % p.a. from the date of complaints i.e. on 25.02.2015 till final realization.

 

Keep the Original Judgement in Complaint.No.116/2015 and copies thereof in other complaint for ready reference.

         

            (This order is dictated to the Stenographer, transcript edited, corrected and then pronounced in the open forum on this 28^th day of April, 2017).

 

 

 

Sri. A.G.Maldar,     President.

Smt.J.S. Kajagar,    Lady Member.