Before the District Forum:Kurnool
Present :Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President
And
Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member
Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., Member
Wednesday 19th day of May, 2004
C.D.No.24 /2004
V.Ramaseshaiah,
S/o V.Bala Seshaiah,
R/o H.No.1/59,
Pendekanti Nagar,
Banaganapalli,
Kurnool District. . . . Complainant represented by his
Counsel Sri.P.Siva Sudarshan
-Vs-
1. The Managing Director,
Medinova Diagnostic Service center,
Near sanjeeva Nagar Gate,
Opp.Dwaraka Hotel,
Nandyal. . . . Opposite party represented by his
Counsel Sri.D.M.Ramachandra Reddy.
2. The Managing Director,
Medinova Diagnostic Services Limited,
6-3-652, Kautilya,
3rd Floor, Somajiguda,
Hyderabad. . . . Opposite party.
O R DE R
1. This Consumer Dispute case of the complaint is under Section 11 and 12 of the C.P. Act seeking a direction on the opposite parties to pay the complainant the maturity amount of Rs.7,850/- in the fixed deposit bearing No.MDR No.01304/XIII with interest at 24% per annum from the date of the maturity till realization, Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony, Rs.1,000/- towards the costs of the litigation and such other reliefs which the complainant may be entitled in the exigencies of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case are that on 11-12-1999 an amount of Rs.5,000/- was deposited by the complainant with the opposite party No.2 through the opposite party No.1 for a period of 36 months for the maturity value of Rs.7,850/- and in token of said deposit the opposite party No.2 issued a certificate bearing MDR No.01304/XIII in favour of the complainant accordingly. On maturity the said deposit receipt was duly discharged by complainant and sent to the opposite party No.2 on 08-02-2003 requesting for the payment of the matured amount, but the opposite party did not arrange the said amounts in-spite of several demands by his avoiding conduct and the said conduct amounts to deficiency of service and driven the complainant to the Forum for redressal as the complainant was not only deprived of the matured amount but also was put to mental agony and costs of this litigation.
3. In-spite of several demand and notices of Banaganapalli Mandal Consumer Council and telegram dated 26-04-2003 and in-spite of service of the notice of this Forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite parties neither turned up to the proceedings nor made any contest to the complainant’s case dis-owning their liability.
4. The complainant in support of its case relied upon the documentary record marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 besides to his sworn affidavit in reiteration of its case and the documents.
5. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out the alleged deficiency of the service on the part of the opposite parties in defaulting the payment of the matured amount and there by his entitleness to the reliefs claimed.
6. The Ex.A2 the attested Xerox copy of the M.D.R No.01304/XIII issued on 11-12-1999 to the complainant by the opposite party receiving Rs.5,000/- from the complainant envisages to pay the said amount with interest on 10-12-2002 as Rs.7,850/-. Its original said to have been submitted to the opposite party by the complainant duly dis-charging it for the payment of the matured amount. The Ex.A3 dated 26-03-2003 of Banaganapalli Mandal Consumer Counsel. The said factum reiterated in the sworn affidavit of the complainant was not rebutted by the opposite parties side. The Ex.a1 is the provisional receipt and the receipt for the Demand Draft and it envisages the payment of the deposit amount to the opposite parties by the complainant. The said factum was also not rebutted by the opposite parties side. The above material clearly establishes the privy between the complainant and the opposite parties as to the said deposit amount.
7. When a Company or Firm invites deposits on a promise of attractive rates of interest, it is a service and the depositor is Consumer as per the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Neela Vasantha Rajee -Vs- Amog Industries reported in 1993 (III) CPR Page 345.
8. The Maharastra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai in sanchayani Savings Investment (India) Limited -Vs- Vatsala Baba Saheb Gyquard reported in I (2003) CPJ page 260 hold Financial Institutions deficiency in its service in not honoring the commitments when amounts under various deposits with the accrued benefits are not released to the depositors..
9. As the opposite parties has accepted the deposits of the complainant to pay the maturity amount of Rs.7,850/- on the date of the maturity they are under the service obligation to honor their commitment and when they avoid for honoring their commitment by releasing the accrued amounts to the depositor their conduct in the light of the above decisions is amounting to deficiency of service towards the depositor.
10. In the light of the above substantiated record as the privy of the complainant with the opposite parties and the liability of the opposite parties towards the complainant and the opposite parties deficiency of service at their non responsive conduct as is made out there appears every bonafidies in the cause of action and claim of the complainant.
11. Therefore, in the result, the complaint is allowed ordering the opposite parties to pay the maturity amount of Rs.7,850/- under MDR No.01304/XIII with an interest at 9 percent per annum from the date of maturity Rs.1,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs within a month of the receipt of the order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the Dictation corrected by us pronounced in the Open Court this the 19th day of May, 2004.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDEX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :- Nil For the opposite party :- Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Provisional receipt dated 15-12-1999 issued by opposite party No.1.
Ex.A2 Attested copy if member ship deposit receipt No.01304/XIII dated
11-12-1999.
Ex.A3 Office copy of letter addressed by Banaganapalli Mandal Consumer Council dated 26-03-2003 to opposite party No.2.
Ex.A4 Copy of Telegram dated 26-04-2003 issued by complainant to opposite party No.2.
Ex.A5 Receipt for issuing Telegram i.e., for (Ex.A4).
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:- NIL
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
