BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER

       DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BAGALKOT.

COMPLAINT NO.22/2017
 

Date: 19^th day of August, 2017

   P r e  s e n t: 

01) Smt.Sharada.K.                                                    President…

     B.A.LL.B. (Spl) 

02) Smt. Sumangala.C.Hadli.                         Lady   Member…

                            B.A (Music)

03) Shri.Shravanakumar.D.Kadi                               Member…

                        M.Com.LL.B.  (Spl)

                V/s

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SMT. SUMANGALA.C.HADLI, MEMBER

The Complainant filed this complaint u/sec. 12 of Consumer protection Act, 1986 seeking direction to Opposite Parties (herein after referred in short as Ops) to refund Rs.66,044/- along with interest @ 18% p.a., Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceeding.

2.   Brief facts of the case are as follows:

The complainant has filed this Complaint against the Ops for refund of the deposited amount of Rs.66,044/-. The complainant had deposited two F.D. receipts in the year 2011 i.e. on 05.09.2011. The Ops have paid only Rs.1,00,000/- as per DICGC and issued balance certificate No.123, claim No.8174 for Rs.66,044/-. OP No.1 and 2 assured to pay the remaining balance amount to complainant, but till today the Ops are not refund the said amount to complainant. Therefore, complainant no other option to file the Complaint.  

3.      After receipt of notice, the OP-Counsel present before the Forum and filed Written Version of OP No.2 and the same has been adopted by OP No.1.

          Written Version of OP No.2 is as hereunder:

          OP No.1 denies all the averments made in the Complaint. It is false to say that this OP No.2 deferred the payment of F.D. amount deliberately. Further, it is false to say that this complainant approached the OP No.2 on many occasions and requested to pay the F.D amount after expiry period. The OP No.2-Bank is a Cooperative Bank Registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 and Rules made there under. OP further submits that R.B.I. has cancelled the licence of the OP No.2-Bank u/s 22 (4) of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 vide its order NO.UBD.CO.BSD.NSB.1/8634/12.23.135/2009-2010, dated: 09.03.2010. In pursuance of said order all the transactions of OP Bank have been ceased. The Government of Karnataka vide its order dated:11.03.2010 liquidated the OP Bank u/s 72 (a) of Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 and appointed the liquidator for disposal of the assets and liabilities of the Bank as per law. OP has already paid Rs.1,00,000/- as per DICGC and he has been issued the balance certificate of Rs.18,491/-. As per Sec. 74 (d) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 the Depositor can claim the interest only upto the date of winding up of the bank. This bank is liquidated on 09.03.2010 and as such complainant is not entitled to claim interest from the date of liquidation onwards. Hence, Ops prays that dismiss the Complaint in the interest of justice and equity.

4.     The complainant has produced documents. The said documents are as follows:

1. Original Balance Certificate,

2. Xerox copy of the Adhaar Card.

5.      By way of evidence, complainant has filed affidavit and filed 02 documents in support of his case. On the other hand, OP No.2 one Sri.Mallappa Padadappa Shellikeri has filed affidavit by way of evidence. Heard the arguments and perused the documents.

6.      After considering the material placed on record, the following points that would arise for our consideration.

1. Whether the complainant has proved her claim as alleged by the complainant?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation?
3. What order?

7.    After considering the evidence tendered by both sides and on careful consideration of the arguments advanced by both sides our findings for the above points are as follows.

1. Affirmative,
2. Partly, Affirmative,

2) As per final order.

R E A S O N S

8. POINT NO.1 and 2: In the instant case to condone the delay and application is filed. Whereas, OP has not resisted it. Apart from the cause of action arises from the date of demand. Therefore, complainant is in time. Hence, we are considered view that delay is requires to be condoned.

9.        The Ops have agreed in their affidavit that the complainant is entitled to the claimed amount as per Balance Certificate No.123 amounting Rs.66,044/- along with interest. The said bank is already liquidated and the liquidator is appointed. As per the documents produced by the complainant it is clearly shows that the Ops have failed to return the remaining balance amount of Rs.66,044/-. This is also agreed by the Ops in Written Version also.

10.    In this case, the complainant is entitled to get the refund of Rs.66,044/-. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- towards the cost of this proceeding from the Ops. In the light of our findings and reasons, we answer Point No.1 in affirmative and Point No.2 in partly affirmative.

11. Point No:3 In the result, the complaint of the complainant is fit to be allowed in part. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

     Complainant’s complaint is allowed in part as follows;

1. The OPs shall have to pay Rs.66,044/- (Rupees sixty six thousand forty four) to the complainant.
2.  The Ops shall have to pay an amount of Rs. Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) towards litigation expenses to the complainant.
3.  The Ops are directed to comply this order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to proceed the case against the Ops as per law.
4.  Free copy of this order shall be sent to the parties immediately.

        (Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 19^th day of August, 2017).