Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/577/2014

Umar S Goundi. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The General Manager. Millat Co-Op Cr Scty Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

S.S.Patil.

16 Oct 2015

ORDER

(Order dictated by Shri. B.V.Gudli, President)

COMMON ORDER

            I. The complainants are same in both the cases, 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.P. society is same, represented by Chairman and General Manager. Hence for convenience all the cases are disposed of by the common order.

          II. Since there are 2 cases and same number complainants are there having same addresses and particulars of their deposits being different, for brevity and also for clarity and to avoid confusion, names of the parties of the particular cases.

          III. The parties will be referred to as complainant/s, and opponents instead of serial number, as in some cases their numbers are different.

          1) The relevant facts of the cases are that the respective complainants 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) After service of notice O.P. No.2 appeared through counsel before the forum and In-spite of service of notice O.P.No.1 remained absent. Hence O.P.1 is placed ex-parte in both cases.

          3) The O.P.No.2 filed objection contending and denying the allegations made by the complainant in his complaint. The O.P. further denied stating that the complainant has not deposited Rs.77,950/- but admitted that the complainant has kept an amount of Rs.50,000/- as F.D. for the rate of 12% P.A. interest for the period from 6/10/2009 to 6/12/2010. The O.P. further contended that the F.D. is not renewed by the complainant therefore the complainant is entitle for only 3% P.A. interest from the date of maturity, and the complainant is entitled for 3% P.A. interest after maturity as paid on S.B. Account. The O.P. further contended that some of the F.Ds. are shown to be doubled in 5 years but infact the O.P. will not sustained such a huge interest. The O.P. further contended that complainant never approached nor issued any notice and there is no cause of action and prayed to dismissed the complaint.

          4) In support of the claim in the complaint, complainant/s has filed affidavit and original F.D.Rs. are produced.

          5) We have heard the arguments and perused the records.

          6) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. and entitled to the reliefs sought?

          7) Our finding on the point is partly in affirmative, for the following reasons.

:: R E A S O N S ::

          8) From the evidence on record it has been proved that the complainant/s have deposited the amount in O.P. society in F.D.R/s. in the respective accounts and for the respective some mentioned in the F.D.R/s. The maturity value, the amount deposited and the dates are shown in the table below;

Sl. No.	Complaint No.	FDR No.	Date of deposit	Amount deposited	Date of maturity	Rate of Interest	matured Amount	Renewed amount
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1)	577/2014	167	6/10/2009	50,000	6/7/2010	12%	-	77,950
		168	6/10/2009	50,000	6/12/2010	12%	-	77,950
		169	6/10/2009	50,000	6/12/2010	12%	-	77,950
		476	16/12/2010	50,000	6/2/2011	10%		68,375
		1789	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		1790	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		1791	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		1792	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		067	25/7/2009	55,000	25/7/2014	Double	1,10,000	-
		068	25/7/2009	33,000	25/7/2014	Double	66,000	-
		072	28/7/2009	52,000	28/7/2014	Double	1,04,000	-
		088	12/8/2009	30,000	12/8/2014	Double	60,000	-
		089	12/8/2009	30,000	12/8/2014	Double	60,000	-
		090	12/8/2009	30,000	12/8/2014	Double	60,000	-
2)	636/2014	117	7/9/2009	50,000	7/9/2014	Double	1,00,000	-
		118	7/9/2009	50,000	7/9/2014	Double	1,00,000	-

 

          9) The complainant requested the opponent to return the matured amount, inspite of that opponents went on postponing the same by assigning one or other reasons. The complainant in his complaint have stated that by selling the house property and Plot in the month May 2013 and the amount after sale was being deposited in O.Ps. society.  The complainant further contended that even after approaching the opponents, denied to make payment of F.D.Rs. Hence opponents committed deficiency in service as contemplated under the provision of the consumer protection act 1986.

10) The O.P. on the other hand, denied the contents of the complainant by filing objection and the affidavit more particularly the interest to be paid by the O.P. after maturity as claim by the complainant. The O.P. No.2 in his affidavit at on page one at unnumbered para 2 as contended that as the complainant No.1 and 2 have kept two independent separate F.Ds. but only one complaint is filed in respect of two transactions and contended that the complaint is not maintainable. After going through the F.D.Rs. we notice that the some F.D.Rs. produced are in the name of 1^st complainant and the some F.Ds. are jointly kept in the O.P. society. Hence the contention that the complaint is not maintainable and would have filed a separate complaint cannot be accepted. The another contention of the O.P.No.2 is that the complainant is entitled for S.B. interest at the rate of 3% after the date of maturity. To this effect the O.P.No.2 has not produced any documentary evidence more particularly the agreement to show that the complainant has agreed for 3% P.A. interest after the maturity. The O.P.No.2 has contended and denied that they have renewed the F.Ds. after maturity and agreed to pay the rate of interest at 10% P.A. but after perusal of the F.D.Rs. overleaf we can notice that on some of the F.Ds. the dates, amounts, months are mentioned and there is also a seal of the society and also that the rate of interest shown is at the rate of 10% P.A. from 28/4/2012 to 6/7/2014. The renewal is on the sheet of paper pined and attached to the F.D.Rs. Hence, the denial of the O.P.No.2 that they are not entitled to pay interest at the rate of 10% during the period of renewal cannot be accepted and believed.

11) On perusal evidence affidavit of the complainant, after maturity of F.D.Rs. the opponent has not paid F.D.Rs. amount. inspite of the demands made to the O.P. has not paid the amount. Hence, the claim of the complainant 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. The O.P. No.2 has denied that the complainant/s has deposited the amount after sale of their property in the form of F.D.Rs. but the complainant has produced a notarized copy of sale deed to show that they have sold the property, has to be believed and accepted.

          12) 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.

          13) Accordingly, following order.

ORDER

          The complaints are partly allowed.

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

Sl. No.	Complaint No.	FDR No.	Date of deposit	Amount deposited	Date of maturity	Rate of Interest	matured Amount	Renewed amount
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1)	577/2014	167	6/10/2009	50,000	6/7/2010	12%	-	77,950
		168	6/10/2009	50,000	6/12/2010	12%	-	77,950
		169	6/10/2009	50,000	6/12/2010	12%	-	77,950
		476	16/12/2010	50,000	6/2/2011	10%		68,375
		1789	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		1790	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		1791	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		1792	2/6/2009	35,000	2/6/2014	Double	70,000	-
		067	25/7/2009	55,000	25/7/2014	Double	1,10,000	-
		068	25/7/2009	33,000	25/7/2014	Double	66,000	-
		072	28/7/2009	52,000	28/7/2014	Double	1,04,000	-
		088	12/8/2009	30,000	12/8/2014	Double	60,000	-
		089	12/8/2009	30,000	12/8/2014	Double	60,000	-
		090	12/8/2009	30,000	12/8/2014	Double	60,000	-
2)	636/2014	117	7/9/2009	50,000	7/9/2014	Double	1,00,000	-
		118	7/9/2009	50,000	7/9/2014	Double	1,00,000	-

 

The O.Ps. are hereby directed to pay the F.D.R/s. renewed/matured amount to the complainant/s as mentioned in column No.9 in respect of F.D.R. No.167, 168, 169 and 476 with future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from the dates 7/7/2014 respectively till realization of the entire F.D.Rs. amount.

Further the O.Ps. are hereby directed to pay the F.D.R/s. matured amount to the complainant/s as mentioned in column No.8 in respect of other F.D.Rs. with future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from the dates mentioned in column No.6 respectively till realization of the entire F.D.Rs. amount.

          Further, the O.P. represented by the General Manager and Chairman are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- in each complaint, to the complainant/s towards costs of the proceedings.

          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.577/2014 and the true copy in other clubbed cases.

 (Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 16^th day of October 2015)

Member                Member                            President.

gm*