Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/767/2013

Bharath A Rawal - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

L M Patel

08 Feb 2017

ORDER

                 

ADDITIONAL  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BELAGAVI

C.C.No.767/2013

                     Date of filing: 19/11/2013

                                                                   Date of disposal:08/02/2017

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.

 

 

 

COMPLAINANT   -

Shri.Bharath S/o Ashoklal Rawal, Age: 36 Years, Occ: Business, R/o: Shop M/s.Textile Pangul Galli, Belgaum. R/o: CTS No.10383, Shivabasav Nagar, Belgaum.                              (Rep. by L.M.Patel,Adv.)

 

 

 

- V/S -

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES  -

1.           2.

The Chairman, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd.,Head Office, 760, Kalmath Road, Belgaum.                       (Rep. by Sri.S.R.Sakri, Adv.)   The Branch Manager, Shree Aashraya Souharda Credit Society Ltd., Shahapur, Belgaum.                                           (Ex-parte)

JUDGEMENT

 

By  Shri. A.G.Maldar, President.

 

 

1.      This is a Complaint filed by the complainant 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 @ 18% p.a. from the date of maturity till realization and compensation of Rs.25,000/- of the complainant towards damages and any other reliefs deemed fit under the circumstances of the case.

 

2.      The facts of the case in brief are that;

 

The case of the complainant is that, the complainant is the customer of the OPs Society and as such the complainant has kept fixed deposits with OPs society. The details of amounts deposited as shown below:-

Sl.No.	F.D. Amount	Date of Deposit	Date of Maturity	A/c No.	Total Amount
01	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3802/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
02	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3803/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
03	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3804/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
04	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3808/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
05	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3810/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
Total Amount :					Rs.10,18,700/-

 

 

It is further contended that, after the maturity of respective F.D. amount i.e. from 31.08.2011 to 08.11.2013, the Ops have to pay interest @ 12% p.a. and future interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization to the complainant and further the complainant has approached the OPs on 26.12.2012 to credit the F.D. amounts to the complainant Bank A/c namely Industrial Corporation Bank, Belgaum. But, the OPs have not credit the F.D. amount alongwith interest and given the memorandum to the said bank at Sl.No.10 alleging that, the F.Ds. amount of the complainant are suspicious and yet to traced out to the said bank.

 

It is further complainant contended that, the complainant has kept F.D. amount with an intention to get lump sum amount to meet urgent expenses of their family, but Opponents have failed to pay the respective matured F.Ds. amount. Inspite of repeated request, the OPs have failed to refund the respective matured F.Ds. amounts and it amounts to deficiency of service as contemplated under the provision of C.P. Act 1986.

 

          It is also further complainant contended that, due to persistent refusal of the OPs to repay the respective FDs amount, the complainant has got issued legal notice to the OPs through their Counsel on dtd:10.07.2012 and notice was duly served to the OPs. But, the OPs had false reply to the said notice on 10.09.2012. However, the OPs refused to return the fixed deposited amount by giving one or other reasons, hence, the complainant has constrained to file this complaint.  

 

3.      The complainant has filed an application U/s. 24(A) of the C.P. Act and the same has been allowed and the delay has been condoned at the stage of admission itself by this Forum on dtd:28.11.2013 as delay is condoned by allowing the I.A.-I.

 

4.      After issue of notice to the Opponents. The Op.No.1, has appeared through his Counsel and resisted the claim of the complainant by filing his written version and Op.No.2  has neither appeared nor filed any version, inspite of giving sufficient time. The Hon’ble Forum proceed the OP.No.2 is placed Ex-parte.

 

The OP.No.1 contended in the written version that, the said F.D. receipts are fake and as such are not within the knowledge of the Op.No.1 and same are not binding upon the OP.No.1, because at that time Mr.Lilesh Sabnis and Amar Salvi were sitting as Manager of the Society and they have received the amount from the complainant and have got issued a Fake F.D. receipts making their signatures only thereupon and had gulped the amount and further the said F.Ds. amount of the complainant are not received by the Op Society is not under obligation to pay the amount and the liability may be imposed on the signatory of the F.D. receipts and the above said F.D. receipts are fake and further contended that, the complainant should be directed to produced receipts for having paid such amount, income tax return or his A/c book before this Forum and therefore, the OP.No.1 prayed to dismiss the complaint.

 

 5.     The Complainant has filed his affidavit in support of his claim and produced Original F.D. Receipts and Account Statement receipts which is issued by the OPs in respect of F.Ds and Application for Collection of F.Ds. amount,  Copy of Memorandum issued by Op.No.1, Copy of legal notice and Reply notice,  we have marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-5, on the other hand, the OP.No.1 has filed his affidavit and produced some documents at the time of argument, which are marked as Ex.R-1 to R-8, for sake of our conveniences, the said documents have been marked as P & R series. The Adv. for complainant and Op.No.1 have filed their written arguments and heard the argument on both sides.

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

02. What order?

 

 

6.      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 :-

 

7.      Point No.1:  We have gone through the pleadings, affidavit evidence of complainant, written arguments and as well as documents on records and further the case of the complainant that, the Ops society established with an object to help the customers of the said society with this object, the complainant has kept FDs with OP society and the said FDs had been matured on dtd:31.08.2011 FDs amounts details as shown below:-

Sl.No.	F.D. Amount	Date of Deposit	Date of Maturity	A/c No.	Total Amount
01	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3802/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
02	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3803/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
03	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3804/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
04	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3808/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
05	Rs.200000/-	01.06.11	31.08.11	3810/31	Rs.2,03,740/-
Total Amount :					Rs.10,18,700/-

the above mentioned respective F.D. receipts produced before the Forum. Further case of the complainant is that, several times the complainant has approached the OPs and requested to refund the respective F.Ds. amount, but the OPs society failed to pay the respective maturity F.Ds. amount to the complainant, these acts of the OPs, amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Ops.

 

Further, the case of the complainant that, after the maturity of respective F.Ds. amount i.e. from 31.08.2011 to 08.11.2013, the Ops had to pay interest @ 12% p.a. and future interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization to the complainant, for that proposition, the complainant has not produced any cogent and reliable evidence to support the contention of the complainant as alleged in the complaint and there is no material document and acceptable evidence to hold that, the complainant is entitled for interest @ 12% p.a. and @ 18% p.a, however the complainant has proved his case towards entitle to receive the respective FDs amount after maturity by producing FDs receipts.

 

 Hence, in our consider view that, the complainant has not entitled to get interests on respective FDs as prayed, for the reason that, as per the respective FD receipts, there were no any renewals of the above said F.D. receipts as alleged by the complainant, it is evident from the document that, after maturity i.e. 31.08.2011, but the complainant is entitled to receive the respective FDs matured amount with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of maturity till realization.

 

Further the case of the complainant that, the complainant has approached the OPs on 26.12.2012 to credit the F.D. amounts to the complainant Bank A/c namely Industrial Corporation Bank, Belgaum. But, the OPs have not credit the respective F.Ds. amount alongwith interest and Op.No.1 has issued the memorandum to the said bank at Sl.No.10 alleging that, the F.Ds. amount of the complainant are suspicious and yet to traced out. The complainant has established his case as alleged in the complaint by producing cogent and material document in respect of matured amount  and the contention of the OP.No.1 as alleged in the written version and affidavit evidence are not acceptable and the said contention is not established by supporting evidence towards FD receipts as alleged in the written version.

 

 Now, coming to the contention of OP.No.1 stated in written version as well as in the argument vehemently argued that,
first of all, the above said F.D. receipts are fake and as such are not within the knowledge of the Op.No.1 and at that time Mr.Lilesh Sabnis and Amar Salvi were sitting as Manager of the Society and they have received the amount from the complainant and have got issued a Fake F.D. receipts making their signatures only thereupon and had gulped the amount and further the said F.Ds. amount are not received by the Op Society is not under obligation to pay the respective F.Ds. amount and the liability may be imposed on the signatory of the F.D. receipts are fake. In order to establish the contention stated in the written version and in argument, it is total contradict to his version, in one breath the OP contended that, the respective FD receipts are fake and in another hand, the OP.No.1 admitted that, he has signed only on the receipts which version of the OP.No.1 as to believe is not established and proved his case towards fake, obviously, if such is the case as alleged by the OP.No.1 they could have filed complaint regarding fake. Otherwise there is no any question regarding the deposit the respective FDs amount in OPs Society and the OP.No.1 has not filed supporting affidavit evidence and not furnished any cogent and material documents to accept the contention contended in written version, but in the instant case mere allegation in written version and the document produced in respect of account which is not sufficient and not helpful to the OPs to establish his case as alleged in the written version and it is not sufficient to hold that, the respective FDs issued by the OPs are fake and even the OP.NO.1 has not prove that, the respective FDs are not issued by the OP.No.1 and said persons are not misappropriation as alleged in the written version, now question arises that, Whether the OP.No.1 has lodged Criminal Complaint against the said persons as alleged in the written version regarding fake FDs, for that, the Op.No.1 has not explained and substantiate, moreover still there were no any Criminal Complaint against the fake FDs receipts, even also the contention of the OP.No.1 as alleged in the written version and affidavit evidence are not acceptable and the said contention is not force and merit.

 

But, merely Op.No.1 insisting and contended that, the complainant should be directed to produced receipts for having paid such amount of income tax return or his A/c book before this Forum, but why the Op.No.1 insisting to complainant to produced such document, which has not been detailed explain and for what purpose? when after maturity respective FDs amount, the mandatory duty of the OPs to refund the respective FDs amount and the OP.No.1 asked such types of questions why it is not explain, it creates doubts towards contention alleged by the OP.No.1. If, the Op.No.1 has got any suspicious regarding respective FD receipts, he could have lodge the Criminal Complaint before the concerned police and initiate the investigation against them who involves. But, without lodging any Criminal Complaint before the concerned police at this juncture, such contention have not merit and not acceptable and the counsel of the OP.No’s.1 has relied a decision reported in  I (2006) CPJ 84 (NC) of  Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi, Wherein the Hon’ble National Commission observe that, when the parties are executed agreement deed between the party without informing the other members, such agreement cannot be binding to members, who are not executed to the agreement. But in the instant case, it pertains to respective FD receipts and demanding refund of FDs amount after maturity, it is totally different to the relied decisions facts and circumstances of this case. Hence, the relied decision of the OP.No.1 is not applicable to this case and not helpful to the OPs case.  So, in our consider view that, the OP.No.1 has failed to establish his case as alleged in the written version as well as in affidavits.

 

It is a duty of the OPs that, after the maturity of above said respective F.Ds. amount a mandatory duty on the part of OPs to disburse or settle the respective F.Ds. amount by giving the make good payment which are fixed by the complainant in Ops society, but the OPs failed to pay the above said respective 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. 

 

For the above said contention we would like to refer a decision of Hon’ble Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai in 2010 (1) CPR 62. Wherein the Hon’ble State Commission observe that, non-refund of maturity amount of F.D. amount, amounts to deficiency of service attracting Sec.2(1) (g) of C.P. Act and further observe that, Consumer Forum have jurisdiction to entertain complaint against the Co-Operative Societies, it is aptly applicable to this complaint. 

 

Therefore, the complainant is entitled to receive the respective F.Ds. 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 above said respective F.Ds. matured amount by the OPs are caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. In our considered view that, it is just and proper to award a compensation of Rs.2,000/- for inconvenience and mental agony. Added to this we also award litigation expenses of Rs.1,000/-. Hence, we answer to Point No.1 in partly affirmative. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following;

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

O R D E R

 

For the reason discuss above, the complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of the C.P. Act – 1986 is here by partly allowed with costs.

 

The Opponent No.1 & 2 are hereby directed to pay the respective maturity amount as per the F.D. receipts with interest
@ 6 % p.a. from the date of maturity i.e. 31.08.2011 till realization. 

 

 

 

Further, the OP.No.1 & 2 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/-  towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/-  being the cost of the litigation to the Complainant.

 

          The order shall be complied within 8 weeks from the date of this order, failing to which the complainant is entitled to recover additional interest @ 1.5 % p.a. from the date of complaint i.e.19.11.2013 till its realization.

 

 

            (This order is dictated to the Stenographer, transcript edited, corrected and then pronounced in the open forum on this 08^th day of February, 2017).

 

 

 

Sri. A.G.Maldar,     President.

Smt.J.S. Kajagar,    Lady Member.