PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 31st day of December 2011
Filed on : 04/02/2011
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member. Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 72/2011
Between
Subhadara N.K. : Complainant
‘Karuna’, 10/449, (By Adv. Sumson T.S.,
South Vymeethi, Paulin Building, T.D. Road
Tripunithura P.O., Ernakulam)
Ernakulam-682 301.
And
The Managing Trustee, : Opposite party
M/s. LIS, No. 3005, (party-in-person)
Palakkal court, M.G. Road,
Ernakulam, Kochi-35.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The case of the complainant is as follows:
The complainant invested a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the scheme of the opposite party by name ‘LIS DEEPASTHAMBAM’ on 20-12-2005. But the opposite party failed not only to proceed with the scheme but also to refund the amount. In the meantime the complainant came to know that the office of the opposite party has been closed down due to police investigation in Crime NO. 672/2006. On 27-11-2010 the complainant caused to issue a lawyer notice to the opposite party demanding to refund the amount, but there was no response. The complainant is entitled to get refund of the deposited amount with 18% interest together with costs of the proceedings. This complaint hence.
2. The version of the opposite party.
The complaint is barred by limitation. The complainant deposited Rs. 1 lakh on 20-12-2005. As per the scheme the opposite party purchased lottery tickets worth Rs. 32,800/-. The complainant had received Rs. 3,985/- from the opposite party as lottery prize. The opposite party has not committed any maturity period or any fixed time to give the additional benefit. The Hon’ble Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam vide order dated 11-08-2006 has directed the opposite party to freeze the Bank account of the opposite party and the matter is subjudice before the Court. The opposite party is ready to give back the entitled amount after deducting the cost of lottery tickets and magazines supplied to the complainant along with lottery commission if any. The opposite party requests to dismiss the complaint.
3. Subsequent to the filing of the version the opposite party opted not to contest the case. Complainant was examined as PW1. Exts. A1 to A3 were marked. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
4. The points that arose for consideration are
i. Whether the complaint is barred by limitation.?
ii. Whether the complaint is entitled to get refund of Rs. One
lakh from the opposite party with interest.?
iii. Costs of the proceedings
5. Point No. i. Admittedly the complainant had joined in DEEPASTHAMBAM PEOJECT of the opposite party and deposited a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 20-12-2005 evident from Ext. A1. Ext. A1 goes to show that nothing is stated regarding the repayment of the deposited amount. So the date of cause of action has arisen from the date of demand by the complainant as per Ext. A2 notice. The opposite party accepted Ext. A2 lawyer notice on 30-11-2010 vide Ext. A3 A.D card. So this complaint is filed within the time prescribed under Section 24 A of the Consumer Protection Act.
6. Point No. ii. The opposite party stated in their written version that they are ready and willing to refund the deposited amount. The opposite party has not produced any document to show the terms and conditions of the project. Moreover they failed to produce any evidence to prove that they have paid Rs. 3,985/- to the complainant. Since nothing is on record to controvert the contentions of the complainant we are only to hold that the opposite party is liable to repay the deposited amount with interest.
7. Point No. iii. The consumer has been put to unnecessary litigation and inconveniences for which the opposite party is answerable. So an exemplary costs of Rs. 1,000/- is awarded with due respect to the rule of law.
8. In the result, we allow the complaint and direct that
i. the opposite party shall refund the amount as per Ext. A1 together with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization.
ii. The opposite party shall also pay Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant towards costs of the proceedings.
The above said order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 31st day of December 2011
Sd/- A Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
