Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/10/1102

V. Srinivas Gupta. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chairman & The Manging Director. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

14 May 2010

ORDER


BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSLAL FORUM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/10/1102

V. Srinivas Gupta.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Chairman & The Manging Director.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED: 13.05.2010 DISPOSED ON: 30.07.2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 30th JULY 2010 PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.1102/2010 COMPLAINANT Sri. V. Srinivasa Gupta, #112/2B, Annapuraneshwari Nilaya, 7th Cross, 2nd Phase, J.P.Nagar, Bangalore-560 078. In Person V/s. OPPOSITE PARTY The Chairman and The Managing Director, M/s. Mukunda Industrial Finance Ltd., HBR Complex, 328/12, 14th Cross, 2nd Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore-560 011. Ex-parte O R D E R SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA, MEMBER This is a complaint filed U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund matured cumulative deposit amount of Rs.2,01,192/- with interest amount from the date of maturity till the date of payment and compensation of Rs.25,000/- on the allegation of deficiency in service. 2. The brief averments made in the complaint are as follows: Complainant being a Senior Citizen deposited the following cumulative deposits with the Op, who is running financial institution and collecting various kinds of deposits from the public. The said cumulative deposits matured on dt:19.01.2010, dt:02.02.2010, dt:03.04.2010 and on dt:04.04.2010. The details of the deposits are as follows; Sl. No. Receipt No. Deposit Amount Date of deposit Rate of interest Maturity value Maturity Date Original bond returned to OP on 1 4622 50,000/- 04.04.08 12 % 63,500/- 04.04.10 05.04.10 2 4659 16,000/- 03.10.08 11.50 18,992/- 03.04.10 05.04.10 3 4643 50,000/- 02.08.08 11.50 59,350/- 02.02.10 02.02.10 4 4640 50,000/- 19.07.08 11.50 59,350/- 19.01.10 18.01.10 Total amount deposited 1,66,000/- Total maturity Amount 2,01,192/- 5 4645 30,480/- To be matured on 26.08.2010. 6 2044 6,000/- Safe locker deposit 3. Complainant submitted original bonds to OP on maturity; on the respective dates mentioned in the table and requested for the payment of the matured amount. OP has made an endorsements for having collected the original deposits receipts on the counterfoils. We have perused the said counterfoils, when OP failed to make the payment, on 22.03.2010 complainant sent a letter under U.C.P requesting OP for payments of the matured amount. There was no response from OP. Again on 13.04.2010 complainant sent notice by registered post requesting OP to make the payment failing which legal proceedings will be initiated at the cost of the OP. Inspite of service of notice there was no response. Hence complainant felt deficiency in service. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint for the necessary reliefs. 4. On behalf of OP Sri. A.G.B, Advocate undertaken to file vakalath for OP. But inspite of giving sufficient opportunity OP failed to file version. Hence taken as version not filed. 5. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced four counterfoils receipts, copies of the correspondences, postal receipts and acknowledgements. OP did not file version or affidavit evidence, hence taken as not filed. Then heard the arguments of the complainant. 6. It is contended by the complainant that he being Senior Citizen deposited total amount of Rs.1,66,000/- on various dates in the form of four cumulative deposits with OP financial institution. The total maturity amount of cumulative deposits is Rs.2,01,192/-. Complainant also claims he has deposited Rs.30,480/- vide R.No. 4645 which is yet to be matured on 26.08.2010. Rs. 6,000/- towards safe locker deposit, but there is no proof of deposit. On 27.07.2010 complainant filed a memo restricting his claim only to the extent of 1st four matured deposits. Hence claim for only four matured deposits are considered. OP has accepted the original receipts on the respective dates mentioned on the counter file produced by the complainant. From the absence of the OP and not filing the version, we can draw the inference that OP admits all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. From the complaint averments and unchallenged affidavit evidence and the documents produced we are satisfied that complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Inspite of repeated requests and correspondences dt:22.03.2010 and 13.04.2010. OP has failed to repay the matured amount of the deposit to the complainant. Failure on the part of the OP to repay the matured amount and in not complying the demands of the complainant amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Therefore we are of the considered view that complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Complainant failed to produce any material in support of the compensation claimed at Rs.25,000/-. Under the circumstances complainant is entitled for refund of the matured amounts with agreed rate of interest with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-. Accordingly we are proceed to pass the following: ORDER The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to pay: In R.No. 4622 matured value of the cumulative deposit Rs.63,500/- with interest at 12% p.a from 04.04.2010 till the date of payment. In R.No. 4659 matured value of the cumulative deposit Rs.18,922/- with interest at 11.50% p.a from 03.04.2010 till the date of payment. In R.No. 4643 matured value of the cumulative deposit Rs.59,350/- with interest at 11.50% p.a from 02.02.2010 till the date of payment. In R.No. 4640 matured value of the cumulative deposit Rs.59,350/- with interest at 11.50% p.a from 19.01.2010 till the date of payment with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 30th day of July 2010.) PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER gm