BEFORE THE  DIST. CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM;  DHARWAD.

DATE:         

PRESENT:

1) Shri B.H.Shreeharsha       : President

2) Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi             : Member 

Complaint No.: 97/2016  

Complainant/s:

v/s

Respondent/s:

O R D E R

By: Shri. B.H.Shreeharsha : President.

1.     The complainant has filed this complaint claiming for a direction to the respondents to refund the deposit amount by deducting loan due amount with accrued interest on it, to pay Rs.25,000/- towards compensation and to grant such other reliefs.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

        The case of the complainant is that, complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.1.80 lakhs with the respondent on 21.06.2008 for a period of 12 months with interest @8% on it under account no.230 dt.21.06.2008. Towards the deposit of the amount the respondent has issued FDR bearing no.12686/30-3-1991 with a receipt Sl.no.828. After maturity inspite of repeated approach and requests the respondent did not paid the amount, as such the complainant approached Dy. Registrar of Cooperative Society. Despite direction of the Dy. Registrar the respondent did not heed up and paid the amount. Hence, the complainant got issued legal notice to the respondent on 15.09.2015. The same was delivered to the respondent on 05.10.2015, but not complied and paid the amount which amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, complainant filed the instant complaint praying for the relief as sought.

Despite service of notice the respondent remained absent. Hence, exparte proceedings initiated by placing the respondent exparte.

        On the said pleadings the following points have arisen for consideration:

1.  Whether complainant has proved that there was deficiency in service on the part of respondents ?

2.  Whether complainant is entitled to the relief as claimed ?

3.  To what relief the complainant is entitled ?

The complainant admits sworn to evidence affidavit relied on documents.  Heard. Perused the records.

Finding on points is as under.

1.    

2.     

3.   As per order

R E A S O N S

P O I N T S 1 & 2

        On going through the pleadings & evidence coupled with documents it is evident that there is no dispute with regard to the fact,  that the complainant had deposited the amount with the respondent.

        Now the question to be determined is, whether the non refund of the amount amounts to a deficiency in service, if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled.

 Since the facts have been revealed in detail which requires no repetition.

The Ex.C1 xerox copy of the FDR in question confirms the complainant has deposited Rs.1.80 lakhs, the respondent and the respondent had assured to repay the same after 12 months with interest @8%.

Both in the pleadings and evidence the complainant admits he has availed loan from the respondent and is in due. Further prayer of the complainant is that to issue direction to the respondent to refund the amount after deducting the loan amount with interest. Except this by producing SB account passbook complainant did not produced any documents to show that he has availed loan and amount is in due. However the complainant voluntarily admits avail of loan from the respondent and is in due.

Since the respondent remained absent the contention of the complainant stood unimpeached. Hence, complainant established case of deficiency in service by the respondent. Hence, complainant is entitled for the reliefs.

In view of the admission by the complainant if it is ordered directing the respondent to refund the balance amount of FDR amount by deducting the outstanding loan amount with interest it will suffice the purpose and it will not cause injustice to either the parties.

Now another question arise on looking into the FDR certificate, wherein rate of interest is mentioned @8% PA the said FDR matures after 12 months from 21.06.2008. There is no documents available to show when the complainant availed loan, what is the rate of interest and what is the outstanding due amount. After taking into consideration of the submission and case of the complainant if the rate of the interest of loan amount is higher than the rate of interest of the FDR amount & in the event the loan is availed subsequent to deposit of the amount the rate of interest of the deposit amount will be taken into account of the rate of interest charged on the loan amount if the loan amount is higher than the FDR interest amount. The same interest will continues till the respondent give deduction to the loan amount and realize the entire loan amount due. Subsequent to realization of the loan due amount balance amount shall be refunded to the complainant with the same rate of interest @8% till realization.

        In view of the above discussions we have arrived and proceed to held issue.1 and 2  .

Point.3: In view of the finding on points 1 and 2 proceeded to pass the following 

O R D E R

        Complaint is allowed in part. The respondent is directed to refund the balance amount after deducting the loan amount as per the observations made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with Rs.1,000/- towards compensation and Rs.1,000/- towards cost of the proceedings.

(Dictated to steno, transcribed by him and edited by us and pronounced in the open Forum on this day on   day of       2016)

(Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi)                                      (Sri.B.H.Shreeharsha)

Member                                                           President

Dist.Consumer Forum                                    Dist.Consumer Forum

MSR