BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MANGALORE

Dated this the 13^th March 2009

COMPLAINT NO.18/2009

(Admitted on 6.2.2009)

PRESENT:              1. Smt. Asha Shetty, B.A. L.L.B., President                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

                                                                                  2.Smt. Sulochana V. Rao, Member

                                                                                  3.Sri. K. Ramachandra, Member

BETWEEN:

Mr.Patrick Pinto,

So Pascal Pinto,

Peace Cottage,

Belman Post 576 111.                 …….. COMPLAINANT

(Advocate for Complainants: Sri Ravivarma.)

          VERSUS

The Managing Director,

G.M.Amusement & Leisure Park Ltd.,

Regd. Office Manasa Park,

Pilikula Nisarga Dhama,

Moodushedde,

Vamanjoor,

Mangalore 28.                     …. OPPOSITE PARTY

(Advocate for Opposite Party : Exparte)

ORDER DELIVERED BY SMT. ASHA SHETTY, PRESIDENT:

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is as follows:

This complaint is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Party claiming certain reliefs.  

          It is submitted that, Complainant had deposited with the Opposite Party a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as per Deposit Receipt No.184 which was matured for repayment on 3.10.2008 and further the Complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- as per Deposit Receipt No.202 as on 13.11.2007 which was matured for payment on 12.11.2008 the contractual rate of interest in both the deposits is at 8.5.% p.a.

          The Complainant submits that, after the date of maturity of the aforesaid deposit i.e. amount of Rs.2,00,000/-.  The Complainant with a covering letter dated 10.10.2008 claimed the refund of the amount.  The Opposite Party after receipt of the above said letter retained the Fixed Deposit Receipt and had forwarded a letter dated 14.10.2008 rejecting the demand of the Complainant and requested to renew deposit for further one year.  And the Complainant had also personally demanded the refund of another deposits i.e. of Rs.1,25,000/- as stated mentioned above.  The Opposite Party again requested the Complainant to renew the deposit.  Since the Complainant requires the deposit for his urgent domestic needs the Complainant not agreed to renew the deposit.  But the Opposite Party despite of the request made by the Complainant not responded to pay the above deposits amounts to deficiency in service and hence the above complaint under Section 12 of the Consumers Protection Act, 1986 (herein after referred to as “The Act”) seeking direction from this Hon’ble Forum to the Opposite Party to pay a sum of Rs.3,25,000/- being the amount deposited along with the interest thereon at 8.5% p.a. till the respective date of maturity.  Further Rs.60,000/- claimed as compensation and cost of the proceedings.

2.       Version notice served to the Opposite Party by RPAD, despite of serving notice, the Opposite Party neither appeared nor contested the case till this date.  Hence, we have proceeded exparte as against the Opposite Party in this case. The acknowledgement marked as Court Document No.1.

3.      The points that arise for our consideration in this case are as follows:

1. Whether the Complainant proves that the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service?
2. If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed?

3. What order?

4.   In support of the complaint, Mr.Patrick Pinto (CW1) filed his affidavit and reiterating what has been stated in the complaint and produced Doc.No.1 to 3. The Opposite Parties neither appeared nor contested the case till this date.

        We have heard and perused the pleadings, documents and evidence placed on record and answer the points are as follows:

R E A S O N S

5.     Points No.(i) to (iii):

The letter dated 10.10.2008 written by the Complainant surrendering the Fixed Deposit Receipt No.184 for claiming refund of the deposit amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and a letter dated 14.10.2008 issued by the Opposite Party denying the refund of the amount and requested to renew the deposit for further one year period and the another document i.e. Fixed Deposit  Receipt bearing No.202 for Rs.1,25,000/- issued by the Opposite Party, the above documents proved beyond doubt that the Complainant deposited Rs.3,25,000/- with the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party agreed to pay 8.5% interest on the above said deposited amount.  It is further proved that despite of the maturity of the above deposits, the Opposite Party refused to refund the amount and requested to renew for further one more year which appears to be not justifiable.  The Opposite Party bound to return the amount along with interest after the date of maturity of the above said deposits.

It is significant to note that, in the present case despite of serving version notice to the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party not bothered to file their appearance or present before the Forum in order to take a defence. The entire evidence/documents produced by the Complainant is not rebutted by the Opposite Party.  The unrebutted evidence and the documents available on record requires no further proof in the present case.  And further the documents available before the Forum is sufficient to hold that the amount under the Fixed Deposit is matured for repayment on the date mentioned therein, which date has been already expired. That the entire amount deposited under the above said certificates not repaid by the Opposite Party till this date amounts to deficiency in service. 

Under the above circumstances, we hold that the Opposite Party is hereby directed to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs.3,25,000/-  being the deposited amount under Fixed Deposit Receipts No.184 and 202 with the interest thereon at 8.5% p.a. (contractual rate) from the date of deposit till the date of payment. Rs.1,000/- awarded as litigation expenses. Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of this order.

6.       In the result, we pass the following:

O R D E R

             The complaint is allowed.  The Opposite Party is hereby directed to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs.3,25,000/- under Fixed Deposit Receipts No.184 and 202 with the interest thereon at 8.5% p.a. (contractual rate) from the date of deposit till the date of payment. Rs.1,000/- awarded as litigation expenses. Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of this order.

The F.D.R. if any, deposited by the Complainant be returned fourth with by substituting the certified.

Copy of this order as per statutory requirements be forward to the parties free of costs and file shall be consigned to record room.

(Dictated to the stenographer, typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 13^th day of March 2009).

PRESIDENT

                            (SMT. ASHA SHETTY)

         MEMBER                                   MEMBER (SMT.SULOCHANA V.RAO) (SRI. K.RAMACHANDRA)

APPENDIX

WITNESSESS EXAMINED FOR THE COMPLAINANT :

CW1- Mr.Patrick Pinto.

DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Doc. No.1: 10.10.2008: Copy of letter of the Complainant

                            surrendering the F.D. Receipt No.184

                            and claiming refund of the same.

Doc. No.2: 14.10.2008: Copy of letter of the O.P. denying

                  the refund of the deposit.

Doc. No.3: 13.11.2007: Copy of F.D. Receipt No.202 for

                    Rs.1,25,000/- issued by the Opposite Party.

COURT DOCUMENT:

Doc.No.1: 2.3.2009: Postal Acknowledgement.

WITNESSESS EXAMINED FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTY:

-Nil-

DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY:

-Nil-

Dated:13.3.2009                                          PRESIDENT