IN THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BELAGAVI.

Dated this 28^th day of September 2016

Complaint No.257/2016

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

                        2) Smt.Sunita                            Member

-***-

Complainant/s:

                  Shri. Shrikant Ganapati Sambaji,

                   Age: 55 years, Occ: Agriculture,

                   R/o. Kednur village, Tq &  Dist.Belgaum.

                    (By Shri. M.B.Patil, Advocate)

                                                          V/s.

Opponents:

1. The Chairman, Shree Kapilnath Credit Souhard

Sahkari Ltd., Having its office at Mahadwar Road, Belagavi.

2. The Secretary, Shree Kapilnath Credit Souhard

Sahkari Ltd., Having its office at Mahadwar Road, Belagavi.

                              (OPs are placed exparte)

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

ORDER

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

          2) In-spite service of notices, O.Ps. remained absent. Hence placed ex-parte.

          3) In support of the claim in the complaint, complainant has filed affidavit and original pigmy deposit passbook.

          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.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 complainant and affidavit filed by the complainant the complainant stated that complainant has deposited his savings in OP society by way of pigmy deposits  as detailed below.

8)      The complainant further alleged that he approached the OPs several times for release of above said amount with interest, but OP postponed the same & the other reasons.  Lastly complainant on 6/5/2016 complainant got issued a legal notice to OPs calling upon them to release the aforementioned amount. The notice sent to OP-1 returned as not claimed and notice sent to OP-2 is served on 11/5/2016. The OPs till date have neither replied nor complied with the said legal notice.  Hence opponents committed deficiency in service as contemplated under the provision of the Consumer Protection act 1986.

9) On perusal evidence affidavit of the complainant the complainant produced the original pigmy passbook which is in the name of complainant & inspite of the demands made to the O.Ps. have not paid the amount and remained unpaid, has to be believed and accepted. After service of notice the OPs remained absent. Hence placed exparte.  It is well settled legal position that non payment of the amount deposited, amounts to deficiency in service.

         10) 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.

          11) 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.

          12) Accordingly, following order.

ORDER

          The complaint is partly allowed.

          The O.P. represented by the Chairman and Secretary are jointly and severally directed and liable to pay a total sum of Rs.61,200/- to the complainant under  pigmy deposit account no.1371 with interest at the rate of 14% P.A. from 03.07.2014 till realization of the entire amount.

Further, the O.P. represented by the Liquidator is hereby directed and liable to pay Rs.3,000/-, 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.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 and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 28^th day of September 2016)

        Member                                        President.

msr