DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 23^rd day of August 2011

Present : Smt.Seena.H. President

: Smt. Preetha G Nair, Member

: Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K. Member Date of filing: 10/12/2009

(C.C.No.174/2009)

V.Krishna Mohan,

S/o.Kesavan Nair,

“Krishnadevam”,

Haritha Nagar,

West Yakkara,

Palakkad - Complainant

(By Adv.Raghudas.S.G)

V/s

1. The Managing Trustee

Deepasthambham Project,

LIS (Regd. Administration Office)

Plackal Court, M.G.Road,

Ernakulam, Cochin – 682 035.

(By Adv.Rajesh.M)

2. Deepasthambham Project,

LIS (Regd) Administration Office,

Plackal Court, M.G.Road,

Ernakulam, Cochin – 682 035.

(Rep.by its Managing Trustee)

(By Adv.Rajesh.M)

3. The Manager,

LIS (Regd),

Sanjoe Tower,

Opp.KSRTC,

Palakkad. - Opposite parties

(By Adv.Rajesh.M)

O R D E R

By Smt.SEENA.H. PRESIDENT

Brief case of the complainant :

Complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.90,000/- in the Deepasthambham Project conducted by the opposite parties. It was agreed by the opposite parties to pay the double amount deposited within a period of 2 years. Opposite parties had made the complainant believe that the project runs as per the Government norms. Subsequently it was known that opposite parties has not obtained sanction from the Government. The amount as agreed was not paid by the opposite parties after the maturity period. The complainant has issued lawyer notice dated 19/10/2009 to the opposite parties on 19/10/2009. Opposite parties though received the notice has not replied. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing the opposite parties to pay double of the deposited amount alongwith Rs.20,000/- as compensation.

Contentions of the opposite parties is as follows:

Deposit of Rs.90,000/- is admitted by the opposite parties. According to the opposite parties the amount was entrusted for supply of lottery tickets and magazines. Opposite parties are accepting money in advance for purchasing lottery tickets and magazines on behalf of the members joining under the scheme and major portion of the commission amount is also given to the members. Opposite parties has not stipulated any period of maturity for the said scheme. The main contention of the opposite party is that on 3/10/2006 the complainant has withdrawn Rs.70,000/- as premature withdrawal under the scheme. Hence complainant is not entitled to make any further claim from the opposite parties. Hence opposite parties prays for the dismissal of the complaint with cost.

Evidence adduced by both parties consists of their respective chief affidavits. Ext.A1 to A5 marked on the side of the complainant. Ext.B1 to B2 marked on the side of the opposite parties.

Issues for our consideration are

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ?

2. If so, what is the relief and cost entitled to the complainant ?

The Complaint was once allowed and it was remanded back from the Hon'ble State Commission for fresh disposal.

Issue I & II

The definite case of the complainant is that the amount deposited with the opposite parties, which was agreed to be returned in double was not returned after the maturity period. Opposite parties admitting the deposit of Rs.90,000/- has contented that the complainant has withdrawn Rs.70,000/- as premature withdrawal towards the said scheme.

Heard both parties and gone through the evidence on record.

Deposit of Rs.90,000/- is admitted and is also revealed from the Ext.A1. The question that arises whether the complainant has withdrawn an amount of Rs.70,000/- as premature withdrawal. According to the complainant opposite parties was supposed to return double of the deposited amount. As per the version of the opposite parties no such period is stipulated under the said scheme. None of the parties has produced documents pertaining to terms and conditions of the scheme. Ext.A4 which is the magazine published by the opposite parties contains an advertisement in which it is stated that

LIS Zo]kvXw`w ]²Xnbn tNcq. Øncambn tem«dnbneqsS `mKyw ]co£n¡p¶Xnt\msSm¸w ]n¶oSv tNcp¶hcpsS tem«dn I½oj\neqsS GXm\pw amk¯n\Iw \n§Ä G¸n¨ ]Ww apgph\mbpw aS¡n¯cp¶Xn\v ]pdsa, A{Xbpw Xs¶ XpI I½oj\mbpw e`nbv¡p¶XmWv. IqSmsX tem«dn k½m\§fpw.

No specific period of maturity is seen in the said advertisement. It is quite interesting to note that on the one hand opposite parties stated that there is no maturity period and on the other hand submits that complainant has withdrawn the amount prematurely. Opposite parties heavily relies upon Ext.B1 & B2 head journal voucher and account status report for proving refund of Rs.70,000/-. PW1 on cross examination has admitted receipt of Rs.70,000/- on 3/10/2006, but submits that the amount so received was not with respect to present scheme. We find that admittedly Rs.70,000/- was received by the complainant. Ext.B1 and B2 also evidences the fact that the amount was received under the present scheme itself. Complainant has signed in both documents. Complainant has no case that it was signed under any compulsion. Hence we are of the view that receipt of Rs.70,000/- is with respect to the present scheme itself. Since no period of maturity is stipulated in the scheme we are of the view that complainant is entitled for the balance amount also. In the result complainant is partly allowed.

Opposite parties are directed to pay the complainant Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) with 12% interest per annum from the date of deposit to the date of order. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order failing which the whole amount shall carry further interest @9% per annum from the date of order till realization.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 23^rd day of August 2011.

Sd/-

Smt.Seena.H

President

Sd/-

Smt.Preetha G Nair

Member

Sd/-

Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K.

Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

Ext.A1 – Photocopy of Deepasthambam Project Certificate dtd.4/1/06

Ext.A2

series – Photocopy of lawyer notice dated 19/10/09 send to opposite

parties alongwith postal receipts and acknowledgment cards

Ext.A3 – Trikalam magazine (original)

Ext.A4 - Advertisement in the Mathrubhoomi Daily.

Ext.A5 - Advertisement in the Mathrubhoomi Daily.

Witness examined on the side of the complainant

PW1 – V.Krishna Mohan

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties

Ext.B1 -Copy of Journal Voucher dated 3/11/06 signed by complainant

Ext.B2 – Copy of Account status report of complainant signed by complainant

Cost Allowed

No cost allowed.

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

Civil Station, Palakkad – 678001, Kerala

Dated this the 29^th day of June, 2010

Present: Smt.Seena.H, President

Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member

Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member

CC.No.174/2009

Krishna Mohan

63 years,

S/o.Kesavan Nair,

Krishnadevam,

Haritha Nagar,

West Yakkara, Palakkad. - Complainant

(By Adv.Raghudas.S.G)

Vs

1. The Managing Trustee,

Deepasthambham Project,

LIS (Regd. Administrative Office)

Plackal Court, M.G.Road,

Ernakulam,

Cochin 682035.

2. Deepasthambham Project,

LIS (Regd. Administrative Office)

Plackal Court, M.G.Road,

Ernakulam,

Cochin 682035

Rep by its Managing Trustee

3. The Manager,

LIS (Regd),

Sanjoe Tower,

Opp. KSRTC,

Palakkad. - Opposite parties.

(By Adv.Rajesh.M for all opposite parties)

O R D E R

By Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member

Complaint in short is as follows:

The opposite parties have started a project in the name and style of “Deepasthambham Project”. The project envisages that the amount entrusted by the member will fetch a minimum of twice the entrusted amount within the stipulated period.

The complainant on the basis of offer made through the advertisements given in media by the opposite parties approached 3^rd opposite party and on the basis of assurance given by the opposite parties, the complainant was made to deposit Rs.90,000/- in the said project on 04/01/2006 and the opposite parties issued a receipt bearing No.152796 with a user name VKRISHNAD 13664 and password VKRISH13 signed by the opposite party. The opposite parties has made the complainant believe that the project runs as per the Government norms and they also made the complainant believe that the amount deposited in the project of the opposite parties will be paid in double of deposited amount with a minimum period of 24 month. Subsequently complainant came to understand that the opposite parties have not obtained any sanction or recognition from the Government. When the complainant approached the 3^rd opposite party, they assured the complainant that they will fulfill their project as promised earlier and they are ready to repay the amount in double on attaining the maturity of deposited amount. The period of maturity will be over on 3/01/2008. Despite several demands made by the complainant, the opposite parties have not returned the amount as agreed. Therefore, the complainant issued a lawyer notice to the opposite parties on 19/10/2009. Though the notice was received by the opposite parties they neither

repaid the amount nor made any reply to the notice. Hence this complaint seeking an order directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- the amount to be paid by the opposite party with future interest at 12% p.a and Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony suffered by the complainant and cost of the proceedings.

Complaint was admitted. Opposite parties entered appearance but has not filed any version or affidavit.

Complainant filed affidavit and Exts.A1 and A2 were marked.

Issues for consideration are;

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

2. If so, what is the relief and cost?

Issues 1 & 2:

The case of the complainant is that the complainant on the basis of offers given in media by the opposite parties approached the 3^rd opposite party and deposited an amount of Rs.90,000/- in the Deepasthambham Project on 04/01/2006. The opposite parties made the complainant believe that the amount deposited by him will get back in double after the maturity period, that is on 03/01/2008.

It is evident from the Ext.A1 document that the complainant deposited

an amount of Rs.90,000/- in the Deepasthambham Project started by opposite parties. According to the offer made by the opposite parties the complainant is entitled to get the double amount of the sum deposited at the time of joining. Despite several demands made by the complainant the opposite parties did not return the amount as agreed. It can be considered as a clear deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.

So we allow the complaint. The opposite parties are directed jointly and severally to pay an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- (Rupees One lakh and eighty thousand only) with 12% interest from 03/01/2008 to 29/06/2010 and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of the order failing which the whole amount shall carry further interest at 9% p.a from the date of order till realisation.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 29^th day of June, 2010

Sd/-

Seena.H,

President

Sd/-

Preetha.G.Nair,

Member

Sd/-

Bhanumathi.A.K,

Member

Appendix

Date of filing: 10/12/2009

Witnesses examined on the side of complainant

Nil

Witnesses examined on the side of opposite parties

Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 – Photo copy of Receipt No.152796 issued by opposite party

Ext.A2 (Series) – Photo copy of lawyer notice dt.19/10/2009 issued by complainant to

opposite parties with acknowledgement and postal receipt

Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties

Nil

Cost (allowed)

Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost