CC Filed on 05.03.2007<br /> Disposed on 22.05.2008<br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR.<br /> <br /> Dated 22.05.2008<br /> <br /> PRESENT:<br /> Sri. G.V.HEGDE, President.<br /> Sri. T.NAGARAJA, Member.<br /> Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, Member.<br /> ---<br /> <br /> Consumer Complaint No.68/2007<br /> <br /> Between: -<br /> <br /> 1. Sri. M.Kannian,<br /> Aged about 65 years,<br /> A-94, Bharath Nagar,<br /> BEML Nagar Post,<br /> K.G.F. – 563 115,<br /> Kolar District.<br /> <br /> 2. K.Gayathri,<br /> D/o M.Kannaian,<br /> A-94, Bharath Nagar,<br /> BEML Nagar Post,<br /> K.G.F. – 563 115,<br /> Kolar District. Complainants <br /> <br /> (By Advocate Sri. Pavan Chandra Shetty)<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> 1. The Chief Executive Officer,<br /> Earth Movers Employees Credit<br /> Co-operative Society Ltd.,<br /> Near Railway Station,<br /> Kolar – 563 101. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> CC No.68/2007<br /> 2. The Chief Executive Officer,<br /> Earth Movers Employees House <br /> Building Co-operative Society Ltd.,<br /> Near Railway Station,<br /> Kolar – 563 101. Opposite Parties <br /> <br /> (By Advocate Sri. Sama Rangappa)<br /> <br /> ORDERS<br /> <br /> This is a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying for a direction against the opposite party No.1 to pay a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- with interest at 21% per annum and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- compensation with costs etc.,<br /> <br /> 2. The material facts of the case as made out from the complaint and version of opposite parties and the documents produced by parties may be stated as fallows: The opposite parties - Earth Movers Employees Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Kolar and Earth Movers Employees House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., Kolar are societies registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act 1959. The societies were authorized to collect the deposits from members and non-members as per the approved by-law. Accordingly the 1st complainant deposited with opposite party No.1 the amount/s as stated below.<br /> <br /> Sl. No. Receipt No. & Date FD Amount in Rs.<br /> 1 1411 25.02.2000 70000.00<br /> 2 1709 03.10.2000 50000.00<br /> Total 120000.00<br /> <br /> Further the 2nd complainant deposited with opposite party No.2 the amount as stated below: <br /> <br /> Sl. No. Receipt No. & Date FD Amount in Rs.<br /> 1 1698 02.05.2003 50000.00<br /> <br /> CC No.68/2007<br /> (Originally the 1st complainant alone had filed complaint only against opposite party No.1 alleging deposit of Rs.1,20,000/- with it. The opposite party No.1 contended part payment of Rs.50,000/- on 10.06.2004 to 1st complainant. The 1st complainant disputed the receipt of this part payment of Rs.50,000/- to him. However the 1st complainant admitted receipt of Rs.50,000/- on 10.06.2004 but contended that this amount was repaid towards the deposit of Rs.50,000/- made in the name of his daughter the 2nd complainant. According to him nothing was payable to 2nd complainant. The receipt issued by 1st complainant shows that the amount of Rs.50,000/- was paid by opposite party No.1 to 1st complainant. Hence it is to be concluded that the payment of Rs.50,000/- is by opposite party No.1 to 1st complainant himself. In that event the 2nd complainant is entitled to refund of Rs.50,000/-. The counsel for opposite parties admitted the liability of Rs.50,000/- to 2nd complainant. To avoid further delay in resolving the dispute completely between parties, both counsel submitted that the 2nd complainant and opposite party No.2 may be impleaded at the time of passing the order and appropriate order may be passed. For this reason the 2nd complainant and opposite party No.2 are added as parties at the time of passing this order. The amount payable by opposite party No.1 to 1st complainant comes to Rs.70,000/- and the amount payable by opposite party No.2 to 2nd complainant comes to Rs.50,000/-.) <br /> <br /> The opposite parties have admitted the receipt of deposits but contended that the interest payable on the above said deposits were paid up to 31.03.2005. However in the pleadings of 1st complainant he had not admitted the receipt of interest up to 31.03.2005, but on the other hand pleaded that no interest was received. The opposite parties <br /> <br /> <br /> CC No.68/2007<br /> produced the proper documents to evidence the payment of interest as contended by them. These documents and also the account books maintained by opposite parties were verified by the learned counsel for both parties. Thereafter at the stage of argument the 1st complainant admitted the payment of interest alleged by opposite parties. <br /> <br /> 3. The opposite parties contended that the present complaint is not maintainable under CP Act and the remedy should be under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act 1959 and that the complaint is not maintainable without notice under section 125 of the said Act. These contentions were found to be untenable after scrutiny of the recent rulings on the said matters. Therefore the learned counsel for opposite parties did not press these grounds. <br /> <br /> The learned counsel for opposite parties submitted that major portion of deposits received by different members, were invested for formation of layout/house sites proposed for allotment to the members of the society and the formation of layout could not be completed within time because of some unforeseen litigation and that some of the borrowers of the society defaulted in repaying the loans borrowed by them, therefore the society could not repay the deposits within time. Therefore he submits there is no deficiency in service. He also submitted that on completion of layout work the society can repay the deposit amounts and that layout work would be completed within short time. He also submitted that for earlier period the interest has been paid at higher rate up to 31.03.2005, therefore the subsequent interest may be charged at 6% per annum. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> CC No.68/2007<br /> 4. The learned counsel for the opposite parties also submitted that the house building co-operative society has purchased lands measuring 9 acre 23½ guntas in survey No.82 to 86, 88,89,92 and 94 of Petechamanahalli, Kasaba Hobli, Kolar Taluk to form the layout and in the present market value the society is going to get huge amount by sale of the sites and the opposite parties will utilize the said amount for repayment to different deposit holders. Further he submitted that the amount to be realized by sale of house sites deducting the expenses to be incurred for formation of layout, may be subjected to charge for repayment of the amounts due to the deposit holders. <br /> <br /> 5. After hearing the learned counsel for both parties and on perusal of the records we hold that the non-return of deposit amounts for any reason amounts to deficiency in service. We think the interest from 01.04.2005 may be charged at 7% per annum on the amount of deposits till the date of realization. As interest is awarded separate compensation need not be ordered. A charge can also be created on the amount to be realized as agreed above by opposite parties. <br /> <br /> 6. Hence we pass the following:<br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed with costs of Rs.1,000/-. The opposite party No.1 shall pay Rs.70,000/- (Seventy Thousand only) to 1st complainant and the opposite party No.2 shall pay Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand only) to 2nd complainant with interest at 7% per annum on the above stated amounts from 01.04.2005 till the date of payment within three months from the date of this order.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> CC No.68/2007<br /> There shall be a charge on the amount to be realized from opposite parties as agreed in Para 4 of the award, for realization of the amount due under this award.<br /> <br /> Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced in open Forum this the 22nd day of May 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />