IN THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BELAGAVI.

Dated this 25^th day of August 2016

Complaint Nos.203, 204 & 205/2016

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

                        2) Shri. V.S. Gotakhindi,            Member

                        3) Smt.Sunita                            Member

-***-

Complainants:

                  Malati D/o. Mohan Desai,

Age: 30years, Occ: Household,

R/o: Plot No.28, Babu Tarapad Nagar,

Belagavi.

 In CC 203/2016

                  Mohan S/o. Sheshagirirao Desai,

Age: 59years, Occ: Service,

R/o: Plot No.28, Babu Tarapad Nagar,

Belagavi.

In CC 204/2016

                  Mrs. Nirmala W/o. Mohan Desai,

Age: 58years, Occ: Pensioner,

R/o: Plot No.28, Babu Tarapad Nagar,

Belagavi.

In CC 205/2016

                             (By Shri. S.R.Sattigeri, Advocate)

                                                          V/s.

Opponents:

          1)      The Chairman,

The Belgaum Postal & RMS Dn. Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd.,       Belagaum, Station Road, Opp. to Head Post office,  I Floor, Belagavi.

          2)      The Secretary,

The Belgaum Postal & RMS Dn. Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd.,       Belgaum, Station Road, Opp. to Head Post office, I Floor, Belagavi.

 (O.Ps. are 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 having same address and particulars of his 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/s have 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.Ps. remained absent. Hence placed ex-parte.

          3) In support of the claim in the complaint, complainant/s have 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) On perusal contents of the complainant/s and affidavit filed by the complainant/s. The opponent Society had offered to pay the better rate of interest and as such the complainant/s had invested the money in form fixed deposit scheme. They have deposited the following sum with opponents details are as below;

8)      The complainant/s submitted that they have received the agreed rate of interest from the date of investment till 31/3/2015. Since after maturity the complainant/s was not in need of money hence, the complainant/s  orally permitted to reinvest the same FDRs from time to time and the OPs society has issued deposits renewal certificate on 05/01/2015 confirming the deposits and declaring the renewal to the complainant/s. The complainant/s further submitted that they went on requesting for paying the interest w.e.f. 01/04/2015 but the OP society assured to pay the same but did not pay the interest. The complainant/s further alleged that in the 2^nd week of April 2016 approached the society for refund the FDRs amount with interest w.e.f. 01/04/2015. But the OPs went on postponing the same on one pretext or the other. 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/s, the FDRs produced by the complainant/s are in the name of the complainant/s and  after maturity of F.D.R/s. the opponents have not paid F.D.R/s. 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.

         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 complaints are partly allowed.

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

The F.D.R/s. amount as mentioned in column No.5  with  future rate of interest 8% P.A. from 01/04/2015 respectively till realization of the entire F.D.Rs. amount.

Further, the O.Ps. represented by the Chairman and Secretary jointly and severally are hereby directed and liable to pay  Rs.3,000/-, to the complainant/s 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.203/2016 and the true copy in other clubbed cases.

 (Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 25^th day of August 2016)

        Member            Member                                President.