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 27th day of September, 2005
C.D.No.61/2005
K. Nagasujala,
D/o. K.Madhusudhan Rao,
R/o. H.No. 25/161/
Sanjeeva Nagar,
Nandyal, Kurnool Dist. . . . Complainant
-Vs-
The Managing Director,
Nagarjuna Finance ltd,
Nagarjuna Hilla Panjagutta,
D.NO. 1-2-597/12, Valmiki Nagar,
Domala Guda, Hyderabad. . . . Opposite parties
This complaint coming on 21.09.2005 for arguments in the presence of Sri K. Lokeswara Reddy, Advocate for complainant and opposite party set exparte and stood over for consideration till this day, the Forum made the following
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, 1986, seeking a direction on the opposite party for refund of the mature amount of Rs.10,000/- with interest at 18% from the date of maturity, Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and suffering and Rs. 2,000/- as costs of the complaint and any such other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the complainant’s father K. Madhusudhan Rao, has deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with the opposite party on 31.7.1997 to 30.4.2001 for three years in his son’s name, under Fixed Deposit Receipt bearing No. C45110000903 and on its maturity on 30.4.2001, the amount to be refunded to the depositor was Rs.10,000/-. After maturity the complainant’s father submitted the said FDR to opposite party for refund of maturity amount, and the opposite party acknowledged dated 18.5.2001 as to the receipt of said FDR. On 1.2.2002 the opposite party addressed a letter to the complainant admitting its liability to pay the fixed deposit amount. Thereafter, the complainant demanded for payment of matured amount on the said deposit and the said demand was not fulfilled by opposite party. Even after that 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 deficiency 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.10,000/- 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 by their absence to the proceedings and remained exparte.
4. The complainants in substantiation of his case relied on the documentary evidence in Ex A.1 to E.A.4, besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant 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 party entitling him to the reliefs claimed?:-
6. The Ex A.1 is the xerox copy of the Fixed Deposit Receipt No.C45110000903, it envisages the deposit of Rs.5,000/- by the complainant with the opposite party on 31.7.1997 to 30.4.2001 for a period of three years for the amount of Rs.10,000/- 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. The Ex A.2 is the temporary receipt issued by opposite party dated 31.7.1997 to the complainant, as to the receipt of Rs.5,000/- under FDR upto 45 months. The Ex A.3 is the acknowledgment dated 18.5.2001 issued by opposite party to the complainant it envisages the receipt of FDR bearing No. C45110000903. It further says that the maturity amount under the above deposit will be repaid to the complainant as per the Company Law Board Order dated 29.2.2000. The Ex A.4 is the letter dated 1.2.2002 of opposite party to the complainant, it admits payment of maturity amount to the complainant within short period. The facts so envisaged in Ex A.1 to A.4 and the complaint averments and the complainant’s sworn affidavit averments in re-iteration of its case are neither denied nor rebutted by the opposite party and hence there appears every bonafidies 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 Commission, 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 firm 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 complainants 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 complainants are remaining entitled to the said maturity amount of Rs.10,000/-. As the opposite party by their non-responsive conduct appears to have caused mental agony and suffering to the complainants and ultimately led the complainants to the Forum for redressal of their grievances and the opposite party are liable to pay Rs.5,000/- 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 matured amount ofRs.10,000/- under FDR No. C45110000903 with interest at 12% per annum from 30.4.2001 along with 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 27th day of September, 2005
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainants For the opposite party
-Nil- -Nil-
List of Exhibits Marked for the complainant:-
Ex A.1 The Fixed Deposit Receipt No. C45110000903 for deposit amount of
Rs.5,000/- (Xerox Copy).
Ex A.2 The temporary receipt dated 31.7.1997 issued by opposite party to the
complainant.
Ex A.3 Is the acknowledgment dated 18.5.2001 issued by opposite party to the
complainant.
Ex A.4 Letter dated 1.2.2002 of opposite party to the complainant.
List of Exhibits Marked for the opposite parties:- Nil-
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER
Copy to:-
1. Sri K.Lokeswara Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool
2. The Managing Director, Nagarjuna Finance ltd, Nagarjuna Hilla Panjagutta,
D.NO. 1-2-597/12, Valmiki Nagar, Domala Guda, Hyderabad
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
Copy was delivered to parties:
