Villas A Upadhe filed a consumer case on 30 Jun 2017 against The Chairman. The Nipani Mahila Co-Op Cr Scty Ltd. Nipani in the Belgaum Consumer Court. The case no is CC/29/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 07 Jul 2017.
IN THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BELAGAVI.
Dated this 30 June 2017
Complaint No. 29 & 30 of 2016
Present: 1) Shri. B.V.Gudli, President
2) Smt.Sunita Member
-***-
Complainant/s: | Sri.Villas Appa Upadhe of Nipani, Age: 72 years, Occ: Retired Servant, R/o: Shintre Colony, Nipani CC 29/2016 Sou.Pramila Villas Upadhe of Nipani, Age: 62 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o: Shintre Colony, Nipani CC 30/2016 (By Sri.S.S.Mekalke. Adv) |
| V/s |
Opponent/s: |
The Nipani Mahila Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Nipani.
The Nipani Mahila Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Nipani.
(OP.1 By Sri.S.S.Chougule. Adv, OP-2 is exparte,) |
(Order dictated by Sri.B.V.Gudli, President)
COMMON ORDER
I. Though the complainants are different, their grievances, allegations and the facts pleaded are same except the details of the deposits by the respective complainants. In all the cases the O.Ps. are same. Hence, for convenience all the cases are disposed of by the common order.
II. Since there are 2 cases and same the complainants are there having same addresses and particulars of the deposits being different, for brevity and also for clarity and to avoid confusion, names of the parties of the particular case only will be shown in the cause title and the details of the deposits will be shown separately in the table.
1) U/s 12 of the C.P. Act., the complainant/s have filed the complaint against the O.Ps. for deficiency of service in not refunding FDRs amount.
2) In support of the claim in the complaints, complainants have filed affidavit and produced some documents including original FDRs. Inspite of service of notice, the OP-2 remained absent. Hence OP-2 is placed exparte. The OP-1 has appeared through her counsel and filed written version and affidavit.
3) We have heard the arguments and perused the records.
4) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainants have proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and entitled to the reliefs sought?
5) Our finding on the point is in partly affirmative, for the following reasons.
:: R E A S O N S ::
6) On perusal of contents of complaints & affidavits of the complainants, complainants had deposited their saved money in OP souhard as detailed below:
Comp No. | FDR No. | FDR Amt | Dt of FD | Period | ROI |
29/16 | 7240 | 19,240 | 21.01.13 | 1 year and above | 8% p.a |
| 7241 | 19,240 | 21.01.13 | 1 year and above | 8% p.a |
30/16 | 7242 | 51,310 | 21.01.13 | 1 year and above | 8% p.a |
As the complainant/s were in need of their deposited amount urgently for their family necessary, they approached the OPs & requested to pay the maturity amount but, OPs have not paid the matured amount to the complainants. It amounts to deficiency of service on the part of OPs. Lastly fed up with behavior of OPs the complainants issued legal notice on 29.11.2014 calling upon the OPs to make payment of matured FDRs with interest. The said notice was duly served on OP-1, whereas the legal notice sent to OP-2 has been returned as ‘left not known, returned to sender’. Inspite of service of notice the OP.1 failed to make payment of FDRs amount with interest. Therefore the complainants are constrained to file these complaints against OPs.
7) On perusal of contents of objection filed by OP-1, the OP-1 has contending that, since beginning till today the Secretary is looking after the entire affairs of the OP society. Thus, the complainant colluding with Secretary of the OP society has created the alleged FDRs in their names. The complainant/s have filed these false complaints against this OP by taking her old age and as the relations between Chairman and Secretary are strained and at the instigation of Secretary the complainant/s have filed these false cases to harass this OP. If the forum comes to the conclusion that OPs are liable to pay the claim amount to the complainant/s then the OPs be granted some easy instalments as the OPs also want to recover the loans advanced to the borrowers and due to heavy draught the OPs are facing various problems in recovering their loan dues from borrowers & hence prays for dismissal of the complaints.
8) On perusal of contents of complaints and affidavits filed by the complainants the FDRs are in the name of the complainants. The OP.1 has mainly contended that the Secretary is looking after the entire affairs of the OP society. Thus, the complainant colluding with Secretary of the OP society has created the alleged FDRs in their names. To prove this contention of OP-1, the OP-1 has not produced any cogent evidence before the forum.
9) On perusal evidence affidavit of the complainants, the complainants produced original FDR receipts, the FDRs are in the name of complainants and after making demands by the complainant for payment of F.D.Rs the opponents have not paid matured F.D.Rs amounts. Hence, the claim of the complainants that inspite of the demands made the amount remained unpaid, has to be believed and accepted. 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.Ps. have been proved.
11) Accordingly, following
ORDER
The complaints are partly allowed.
The O.Ps.1 and 2 as shown in the cause title are hereby jointly and severally directed to pay the matured FDRs amount to the respective complainants as mentioned in the table below.
Comp No. | FDR No. | FDR Amt | Dt of FD | Period | ROI |
29/16 | 7240 | 19,240 | 21.01.13 | 1 year and above | 8% p.a |
| 7241 | 19,240 | 21.01.13 | 1 year and above | 8% p.a |
30/16 | 7242 | 51,310 | 21.01.13 | 1 year and above | 8% p.a |
The deposited FDRs amount of the respective cases as per column.3 with agreed interest @8% P.A. from the date of their respective deposit till realization of entire amount.
Further, the O.Ps.1 & 2 as shown in the cause title are hereby jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.3,000/-, to the complainants in each case towards cost of the proceedings.
The order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of the order.
Original order be kept in Compt.29/2014 & its copy in Compt.30/2014.
(Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 30 June 2017)
Member President.
MSR
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.