Kerala

Idukki

CC/19/2020

Roy Mathew - Complainant(s)

Versus

The High range marketing co-operative society ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Avd: AM Michael

24 Jan 2023

ORDER

 

DATE OF FILING : 22/01/2020

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, IDUKKI

Dated this the 24^th day of January 2023

Present :

              SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR                                               PRESIDENT

              SMT.ASAMOL P.                                                          MEMBER

              SRI.AMPADY K.S.                                                        MEMBER

CC NO.19/2020

Between

Complainant                          : Roy Mathew, S/o Mathew,

                                                 Residing at Thekkumkattil House,

                                                 Suvarnagiri Bhagam, Kattappana Village.

                                                   (By Adv.A.M.Michael))

                                                           And

Opposite Party :                   1 . The High Range Marketing Co-Operative Society Ltd.,

                                                  Reg. No.1-578, by the Secretary,

                                                  Jobin Varghese, Neyvelikkunnel,

                                                  High Range Marketing Co-Operavice Society,

                                                  Kumily P.O., Attappallam,  1^st Mile, Idukki District.

                                             2 . K.V.Joseph, President,   Kodathussery House,        

                                                  The High Range Marketing Co-Operavice

                                                  Society Ltd.,  Kumily P.O.,

                                                  Attappallam,  1^st Mile, Idukki District.

                                                  (Both by Adv.Jomon K.Chacko)          

 

O R D E R

SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

 

Complainant filed this complaint against opposite parties raising certain allegations and prayed for the reliefs hereinafter mentioned.

 

1 . The opposite party is the Secretary of High Range Marketing Co-Operative Society Ltd.  That on 10/12/2014 the opposite party along with some Board members of the High Range Marketing Co-Operative Society approached the complainant.  They explained regarding the Society, the

(Cont......2)

-2-

benefits of making deposits with them, service of the society etc., more over requested the complainant to deposit with the opposite party’s society.  Believing the benefits and services assured by the opposite parties, the complainant deposited Rs.5 Lakhs as fixed deposit for a term of six months on 11/12/2014 in A/c N0.82.  The due date of the above fixed deposit in on 11/06/2015.

 

2 . On 11/06/2015, ie on the maturity date of the fixed deposit complainant approached the opposite party demanding the amount.  But unfortunately the opposite party informed that there arise some shortage of funds and so not able to give the amount and its agreed interest.  The opposite party is legally bound to disburse Rs.5,25,000/- including the agreed interest to the complainant on 11/06/2015.  Even the agreed interest amount was also not paid by the opposite party.

 

3 . Thereafter many times directly and over the phone the complainant made demands to the opposite party for the amount deposited with them.  For one reason or another the opposite party purposefully denied the payment of the deposit and adamantly denied the service which the opposite party had assured.

 

4 . While matters being so in the month of December 2019 the opposite party informed to the complainant that the society is functioning profitably and there is no financial crisis.  So complainant can withdraw the deposited amount and its interests.  Thus on 05/12/2019 complainant made a request in writing to the opposite party demanding the fixed deposit with interest.  But the opposite party wilfully denied the request and was not even ready to hear the complainant.

 

5 .   The complainant alleges severe deficiency in service against opposite party in denying his legal right to get the fixed deposit amount with assured interest.  The amount deposited by the complainant is required for his financial needs.  This is defeated by the unlawful acts and deficiency in service of the opposite party, and it resulted in financial loss as well as mental

 

(Cont......3)

-3-

 

agony to the complainant.  For that the opposite party is liable to pay compensation.  The fixed deposit amount of Rs.5 Lakhs with interest up to the maturity date ie, 11/06/2015 is Rs.5,25,000/- is to be paid to the complainant by the opposite party.  And also from 11/06/2015 to till the date 12% interest over the fixed deposit amount ie., Rs.5 Lakhs is to be recovered from the opposite party.

 

6 . Complainant is financially as well as mentally desperate.  The opposite party is denying the services which are bound to provide.  Moreover the opposite party have legally no right to hold the matured fixed deposit amount with them.  The cause of action for the above arose on 11/12/2014, 11/06/2015 and 05/12/2019 and continuously thereafter in Kattappana Village. Alleging deficiency in service  he filed this complaint praying for the following reliefs.

 

1 . Opposite parties may be directed to release the fixed deposit amount with agreed interest to the complainant from date of deposit till date of payment.

 

2 . Rs.25,000/- may be allowed to be realized from the opposite parties for the difficulties, mental agony and financial difficulties caused by the opposite parties.

 

3 . Cost of the petition may be realized from the opposite  parties.

 

4 . Such other reliefs that the Hon’ble forum deems fit and proper in the interest of justice may also be allowed.

 

Opposite parties filed written version as follows.

 

1 . The above petition is not maintainable either in law and facts.  The opposite parties are currently bearing the positions of Secretary and president of High Range Marketing Co-Operative Society Ltd. During the tenure of

 

(Cont......4)

-4-

 

this opposite parties, we have never approached and requested the complainant for any deposit assuring the benefits as stated in the complaint.

 

2 . All the facts stated in the paragraph 3 to 5 are denied as false.  The opposite parties do not know about such facts stated in paragraph 3 to 5.

 

3 . This opposite parties have not made any deficiency in service rendered by the society to any of its customers during the tenure of this opposite parties.  So facts stated in paragraph 6 of the complaint is denied as false.

 

4 . This opposite parties never caused mental agony to the complainant through making wilful deficiency in the service of the society.

 

5 . In the above circumstances the petition of the complainant may be dismissed with the cost of this opposite parties.

 

Complainant filed proof affidavit and examined as PW1.  Following 2 documents were marked as Exts.P1 and P2 respectively.

 

Ext.P1 – Copy of FD receipt dated 11/12/2014 with A/c. No.82 showing deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- in the name of complainant.

 

Ext.P2 – Photocopy of a letter dated 05/12/2019 stated to be given to Secretary of opposite party by the complainant.

 

No oral or documentary evidence was adduced from the side of opposite parties.

 

Heard both sides.

 

We have examined the pleadings and evidence adduced.  On a perusal of the same, following points arise for consideration.

 

(Cont......5)

-5-

 

1 . Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

2 . If so, for what reliefs the complainant is entitled to?

 

3 . Litigation costs.

 

Point Nos.1 and 2

 

       The contention of complainant is that opposite parties had not given maturity amount of FD on due date or thereafter even though he has requested for payment of the same.  The deposit is seen made on 11/12/2014 with maturity date on 11/06/2015.   From Ext.P1, it is seen that opposite party society offered 10% interest on FD.  As such the maturity value should be Rs.5,25,000/- on 11/06/2015.  The opposite parties have not denied the deposit of FD in the written version filed. They have no contention that maturity amount was given to complainant.   From the complaint and version, it is not ascertainable who was the President and Secretary of the society during the period of deposit or maturity.  Opposite party’ contention  is that the present President and Secretary are K.V.Joseph and Jobin Varghese.  They have represented Opposite party’ society and filed the written version.   There was no specific denial regarding the deposit in question.  The only contention is that during their tenure they have not approached and requested the complainant  for any deposit assuring the benefit stated in the complaint.  This shows that they have not denied the existence of fixed deposit.  They have also no claim that no amount was due to the complainant as alleged.  From the evidence on record, it is seen that the allegations of complainant are forcefull.  From Ext.P1, it is seen that the opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.5 Lakhs plus Rs.25,000/- for six months @ 10% interest.   Now more than 7 years have elapsed.  Society is a legal entity and its activities are carried out by office bearers during the relevant time.  Hence present office bearers are liable to return the amount on behalf of the society.   The opposite parties are legally bound to return the FD with assured interest.  They cannot deviate from the assurance given.  It is the contract between 2 persons and the terms and    conditions    of     the    contract    is    to   be   complied    with.

(Cont......6)

-6-

 

The opposite parties have miserably failed to rebut the contentions of the complainant.  In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties in performing their duties.   As such they are also responsible to compensate the complainant.  In the given facts and circumstances, we are of the view that complainant is entitled to get Rs.5,25,000/- being the maturity value as on 11/06/2015 with further simple interest  @ 8% on principal amount of Rs. 5 Lakhs from 11/06/2015 till realization.  The complainant is also found to be entitled for a reasonable compensation of Rs.5000/- for his loss and mental agony.  Hence point nos.1 and 2 are answered as above.

 

Point No.3

 

Considering the facts of the case, we find that a litigation cost of Rs.2000/- to be awarded to the complainant.  Point No.3 is answered accordingly.

 

In the result,  complaint is allowed in part with the following directions to the opposite parties.

 

1 . Opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5,25,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs and Twenty Five Thousand only) being the maturity amount as per Ext.P1 along with 8% simple interest per annum on the principal amount of Rs.5 Lakhs from 11/06/2015 to the complainant within 30 days of receipt of this order.

 

2 . They are also directed to pay a compensation of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the complainant within the above period.

 

Litigation cost of Rs.2000/- is also to be paid to the complainant by the opposite parties within time limit stated above.

 

 

 

(Cont......7)

-7-

 

If the opposite parties fail to comply with directions given above, complainant is entitled to recover the amounts ordered above with further interest @ 8% simple interest per annum on the principal amount of Rs.5 Lakhs and on compensation ordered from the expiry of 30 days mentioned above.  There will be no interest on cost ordered.

 

Extra copies to be taken back by parties without delay.

 

 Pronounced by this Commission on this the  24^th day of January, 2023.

 

                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                        SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

                                                                                           Sd/-

                                                                  SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT

                                                                                  Sd/-                                                                    

                                                                        SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER  

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1 – Roy Mathew

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 –   Copy of FD receipt dated 11/12/2014 with A/s No.82 showing

                  deposit of Rs.50,000/- in the name of complainant.

Ext.P2  –  Photocopy of a letter dated 05/12/2019 stated to be given to

                 Secretary of opposite parties by the complainant.

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

 

                                                                                               Forwarded by Order

 

 

                                                                                          ASSISTANT REGISTRAR