Karnataka

Gadag

CC/193/2010

Muttappa D K - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Vyasaya Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

V.R.Navallimath

02 Dec 2010

ORDER

              COMMON ORDER

Judgment by Smt.G.Shyamala, President.

 

In these three complaints though the complainants are different persons, but the Respondent and the facts in disputes are one and same. Hence, in order to avoid repetition, we have decided to dispose of these three cases by Common Order.

2.      In complaint No.176/2010, the complainant has deposited Rs.5,000=00 on 10.05.2001 with Respondent Bank under F.D. No.246 and it will matured on 10.12.2005 when the complainant demanded the maturity amount and interest from the Respondent Bank, but it failed to respond to the request of the complainant. Hence, the complainant after issuance of legal notice filed this case with a request to condone the delay in filing the complaint and further pray to direct the respondent to pay Rs.10,000=00 with interest and court cost and compensation.

 

3.      In complaint 177/2010, the complainant has deposited Rs.1,000=00 with Respondent Bank 29.06.2000 under F.D. for period of 55 months in Account No.210. The said F.D. was matured on 29.01.2005 but the respondent failed to repay the F.D. amount and interest. Hence, after issuance of notice filed this Complaint and pray to direct the respondent to pay the F.D. matured amount with interest and cost.

 

4.      In Complaint No.193/2010, the complainant has deposited Rs.10,000=00 with respondent Bank and after its maturity the respondent Bank credited the F.D. matured amount of Rs.20,000=00 in the S.B. Account of the complainant bearing No.229/2007 on dated: 18.05.2005. The complainant has withdrawn Rs.10,000=00 vide cheque No.012538 and again drawn Rs.500=00 on 05.05.2006 by another cheque, again drawn Rs.6,000=00 on 16.05.2006. In all the complainant has drawn Rs.16,500=00 from his S.B. Account still the balance in his S.B. Account was Rs.3,500=00. When the complainant intended to draw this S.B. amount from his S.B. Account, the respondent failed to pay the same. Hence after issuance of notice, the complainant has filed this case and pray to direct the respondent to pay Rs.3,500=00 with interest and cost.

5.      After service of notice, the respondent appeared through Counsels in all these three cases, but not filed any objections to these three complaints. But, the respondent Bank in complaint No.193/2010 has deposited Rs.4,270=00 through Chelan to the account of this Office and it also deposited in Complaint No.177/2010 Rs.2,465=00 on 16.11.2010 vide Chelan to the Account of this Office.

 

6.      The complainants have produced their affidavits and also the F.D. Receipt and S.B. Passbook copy and notice copies, acknowledgments and reply of respondent’s advocates.

 

7.      Heard both sides. Now the points that arise our consideration are as under: 

1)      Whether the complainant in these

          3 cases have proved that there is a

          deficiency of service on the part of the

          Respondents as alleged in their complaints

          respectively?

 

2)      Whether the complaints in these 3 complaints

          are entitled the relief sought for?

 

3)      What Order?

 

8.      Our findings to the above points are as under:

1.      Affirmative,
2.     Partly Affirmative,
3.     As shown in the operative portion of the order here below.

                        

                                                             R E A S O N S

 

9.  POINT NO.1:  In these three complaints, the complainants being the A/c holders and Consumers with respondent Bank have deposited their money as alleged in their complaints in F.D. Account. After maturity of their F.D., they were not able to receive the amount from the Respondent Bank. Hence, alleging deficiency of the respondents filed these cases. Though the respondent Bank appeared through counsels but did not filed any objections to these complaints. However, the burden is on the complainants to prove their case as per their pleadings. Accordingly, the complainants by producing original F.D. receipts and S.B. passbook and also through their affidavits proved the deposit of amount with respondent Bank. When the complainant before filing these cases issued legal notice to the respondent claiming their amount, the respondent Bank advocate in reply to these notices has admitted the claim of the complainant but denied other allegation. When such being the facts and proof from the side of the complainants, we are of the opinion that the respondent Bank deficient in discharge of it’s duty towards it’s customers. Therefore, we have answered this point in the affirmative.

 

10.  POINT NO.2:  In complaint No.177/2010, the respondent Bank has deposited Rs.2,465=00 to the Account of this Office and also produce the Chelan copy. The respondent Bank in complaint No.193/2010 has deposited Rs.4,270=00 to the Account of this Office and also produce the copy of the Chelan. On the perusal of these payments made by the respondent Bank and also the prayer of the complainants in these 2 cases, we are of the opinion that the respondent Bank has deposited the due amount to the complainants. The Respondent Bank has calculated the interest at S.B. rate after maturity of F.D. amount and paid accordingly in these 2 cases. However, there is a delay in payment of amount to these 2 complainants, hence we are of the opinion that the complainants are entitled in these 2 cases (CC NO.177/2010 and 193/2010) compensation of Rs.1,000=00 each and Rs.500=00 court cost in each case.

          11.    In the complaint No.176/2010, there is no payment by the respondent during the proceeding of this Case. In this case, the complainant has deposited Rs.5,000=00 on 10.05.2001 and it was matured on 10.12.2005, then he is entitled Rs.10,000=00 from the respondent Bank. Then from the date of maturity till payment he is entitled S.B. interest on Rs.10,000=00. Therefore, the respondent Bank is under liability to pay Rs.10,000=00 with future interest at S.B. rate from 11.12.2005 onwards on Rs.10,000=00 till full payment and also pay Rs.1,000=00 towards compensation and Rs.500=00 towards cost. The delay in filing this complaint was explained in his affidavit annexed to I.A. u/s 24 A (1) of the C.P. Act, the same was considered and delay was condoned. With this, we have answered the Point No.2 Partly affirmative and pass the following: 

                                                                  O R D E R

 

The Complaints Nos.:176/2010, 177/2010 and 193/2010 are hereby partly allowed.

The respondent Bank is hereby directed to pay Rs.1,000=00 (Rupees one thousand) each towards compensation to the complaints No.177/2010 and 193/2010 and also pay Rs.500=00 (Rupees five hundred) each towards court cost. Further, the respondent Bank shall pay Rs.10,000=00 (Rupees ten thousand) with future interest at S.B. rate from 11.12.2005 on Rs.10,000=00 till payment and also pay Rs.1,000=00 (Rupees one thousand) compensation and Rs.500=00 (Rupees five hundred) towards cost in complaint No.176/2010.

The respondent Bank shall pay the above ordered amount within 1 month from the date of this Order.

The original order shall be kept in CC No.176/2010 in other files.

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court 2^nd day of December, 2010)

 

 

 

Sri F.P.Laxmeshwarmath     Sri S.G.Palled,             Smt. G. Shyamala,

          Member.                        District Judge (R)                           Member.

                                                      President.