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
Tuesday the 28th day of June, 2005
C.D.No.78/2005
K.Swarnalatha Devi,
D/o. K. Radhakrishna Murthy,
Principal, Vavilala Junior College,
Door No. 50/423,
Endowments Colony,
B-Camp Post,
Kurnool Dist. . . . Complainant represented by his
Counsel Sri J.Swamy Reddy.
-Vs-
1. The Managing Director,
Medinova Diagnostic Services Centre,
6-3-452, Kowtilya,
3rd floor, Somajiguda,
Hyderabad. . . . Opposite party
O R D E R
(As per Smt C.Preethi, Hon’ble Lady Member)
1. This consumer dispute case of the complainant is filed under section 12 of the C.P Act, seeking a direction on the opposite party for refund of the mature amount of Rs.7,850/- with interest at 18% from 19.12.2002, Rs.2,500/- as compensation for the mental agony and suffering, Rs.2,500/- as costs and any such other relief which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that she has deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with the opposite party on 20.12.1999 to 19.12.2002 for three years under membership deposit receipt bearing No. 1007/XIII and on its maturity on 19.12.2002 the amount to be refunded to the depositor was Rs.7,850/-. After maturity the complainant send the said MDR to opposite party
for refund of maturity amount, but the opposite party did not pay the said maturity amount inspite of several requests and demands. As the above conduct of the opposite party in not paying the maturity amount is amounting to deficieny of service to the complainant. Hence the complainant was constrained to file this complaint against the opposite party demanding the payment of the maturity value of Rs.7,850/- with over due interest. The above conduct of the opposite party in not refunding the amount and not keeping its commitments amounting to deficiency of service and driven the complainant to the Forum for redressal.
3. Inspite of receipt of the notice issued by this Forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite party did not turn up to the case proceedings by filing any written version in their defence and by their absence to the proceedings and remained exparte.
4. The complainant in substantiation of his case relied on the documentary evidence in Ex A.1 to E.A.3 besides to her sworn affidavit in reiteration of his complaint averments.
5. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out the alleged deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties entitling him to the reliefs claimed?:-
6. The Ex A.1 xerox copy of the membership deposit receipt No. 01007/XIII, envisages the deposit of Rs.5,000/- by the complainant with the opposite party on 20.12.1999 to 19.12.2002 for a period of three years for the amount of Rs.7,850/- refundable on maturity. In the absence of any contra material there
appears no material to doubt the bonafidies of the factum envisaged in Ex A.1.
7. The Ex A.2 is the acknowledgement dt 3.1.2003 issued by opposite party to the complainant acknowledging the receipt of MDR No. 01007/XIII matured on 19.12.2002 for Rs. 7,850/- and informing the complainant about the delay in the payment of maturity amount due on the maturity date and request further time for payment of maturity amount, the Ex A.3 is the letter dt 11.2.2004 of opposite party to the complainant requesting for further time of 18 months for releasing the payment of maturity amount. The facts so envisaged in Ex A.1 to A.3 and the complaint avernments and the complainant’s sworn affidavit avernemnts in re-teration of its case are neither denied nor rebutted by the opposite party and hence there appears every bonafides in the claim of the complainant.
8. When a Company or Firm invites deposits on a promise of attractive rates of interest or attractive sums it is a service and the depositor is a consumer as per the decisions of the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissin, New Delhi in Neels Vasantha Raji Vs Among Industries reported in1993 (3) C.P.R page 345.
9. When the amount under the deposit with accrued benefit not released to the depositor by the financial institution, the said conduct of not honoring the said commitment amounts to deficiency and the financial institution is liable to refund the accrued amount with 12% interest as per the decision of the Hon’ble Maharastra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai in Sanchyani savings and Investments (India) limited Vs Vastla Baba Saheb Gai Quard reported in I (2003) C.P.J page 260.
10. In the present case also the opposite party firms inviting the public deposits on a promise of payment of matured amount on a tenure of three years from the date of deposit did not kept up the said commitment to the complainant by avoiding the payment of matured amount. Thus, the said lapsive conduct of opposite party is amounting to deficiency of service at the complainant consumer depositor and there by the grievances are covered under the supra stated decisions holding the liability of the opposite party for refund of accrued matured amount with 12 % interest per annum form the of maturity. Hence, the complainant is remaining entitled to the said maturity amount of Rs.7,850/-. As the opposite party by their non-responsive conduct appears to have caused mental agony and suffering to the complainant and ultimately led the complainant to the Forum for redressal of her grievances the opposite party are liable to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and suffering and Rs.1,000/- as costs.
11. Therefore, in the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to pay to the complainant Rs.7,850/- with interest at 12% per annum from 19.12.2002 along with Rs.2,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and suffering and Rs.1,000/- as costs within a month of the receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the dictation, corrected by us, pronounced in the Open Court this the 28th day of June, 2005
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant For the opposite party
-Nil- -Nil-
List of Exhibits Marked
For the complainant For the opposite party
Ex A.1 is the Xerox copy of MDR - Nil-
NO. 01007/XIII for matured amount
of Rs. 7,850/-.
Ex A.2 is the acknowledgment
Dt 3.1.2003 issued by opposite party
to the complainant.
Ex A.3 is the letter dt 11.2.2004 of opposite
Party to the complainant.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER
