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
Monday this the 9th day of June, 2003
C.D.No.12/2003
G.Nagaiah,
S/o Venkata Samaiah(Late),
N.S.C.Farma post,
H.No.19/22-A,
Sangaiah peta,
Nandikotkur Town,
Kurnool. . . . Complainant represented by his counsel
Sri K.Prabhakar.
-Vs-
The Nagarjuna Finance Ltd.,
Represented by its Managing Director,
S.Chari,
Plot No.55,
Nagarjuna Hills,
Panjaguta,
Hyderabad. . . . Opposite party
O R D E R
(As per Smt. C. Preethi, Hon’ble Lady Member)
This complaint of the complainant is filed Under Section 12 of C.P.Act, 1986, seeking direction against the opposite party to pay her the maturity amount of RS.40, 000/- with 20.31% interest per annum from the date of maturity i.e 11.3.2001, RS.10, 000/- towards compensation and RS.2, 000/- towards costs of the complaint.
The case of the complaint is that the opposite party is the registered finance company represented by its Managing Director. The said company invited deposits from the public and promised prompt repayment of double the deposited amount after 45 months on maturity date .The complainant being attracted by the said scheme deposited RS. 20,000/- on 11.6.1997 and the opposite party had to pay double the deposited amount
RS.40, 000/- on maturity date i.e 11.3.2002. The opposite party also issued a Fixed Deposit receipt in favour of the complainant bearing No. C 45110000330 dated 11.6.1997 and the date of maturity mentioned in the receipt as 11.3.2001. The complainant after the maturity date approached the opposite party by submitting the original FDR for payment of maturity amount but the opposite party evaded making any payment even after receiving the original FDR. The complainant there after made several approaches and demands to the branch office of the opposite party in Kurnool which was closed later, being vexed with the conduct of the opposite party, the complainant also got issued a legal notice dated 10.10.2002. The conduct of the opposite party in not paying the amount held deficiency of service to the complainant. Hence the complainant is entitled to the maturity amount with interest also at the rate of 20.31% from the date of maturity.
In support of the complainant's contentions the complainant side relied upon the (1) Xerox copy of FDR issued by opposite party dated 13.6.1997 (2) Office copy of legal notice dated 10.10.2002 (3) Postal acknowledgement of legal notice (4) Postal registration receipt of registered post and they are marked as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.4 for the purpose of their appreciation. The complainant also filed his sworn affidavit re-iterating his complaint averments.
The opposite party though received the notice of the Forum did not choose to file any objection statement and the case the proceeded exparte and on the basis of the material placed on record.
Hence the point for consideration to what relief the complainant is entitled to?:-
The case of the complainant is that he deposited RS.20, 000 /- on 11.6.1997 and on maturity the opposite party has to pay Rs.40, 000/- but failed to pay the maturity amount though promised to pay on maturity date. As no material is placed on record by the opposite party to rebutt the contentions of the complainants and hence the contention of the complainant stands unrebutted. It is clear from Ex.A.1 that the maturity amount of RS.40,000/- is to be paid to the complainant on 11.3.2001 it self but the opposite party failed to pay the maturity amount to which the complainant is entitled to More over the opposite party failed even to give reply to the legal notice and there after committed default in not paying the maturity amount and the complainant is remaining entitled to the interest also on the maturity amount from the date of maturity.
As stay vacated has been intimated, the complainant proceeded with the case and the opposite party remained absent on the adjournment date the case is proceeded exparte against the opposite party and relying on the sworn affidavit of the complainant and documents marked, the opposite party is liable to pay the maturity amount of RS.40,000/- with interest.
The complainant further relies on the decision of the Hon'ble National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Neela Vasant Raje Vs Amogh Industries and another 1993(3) C.P.R page 345, where in it was held when the company or a firm invited deposits on a promise of attractive rate of interest is a service and the depositor is a Consumer.
In the light of the abode decision, the District Forum can entertain the complaint of the complainant as he is a Consumer under Consumer Protection, 1986.
To sum up of the above discussion and in light of the above decision the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to pay the maturity amount of RS.40, 000/- to the complainant and as the opposite parties has driven the complainant to seek redressal in the Forum by their defaultive conduct and deficiency of service, an amount of RS.4,000/- is awarded as compensation and RS.500 as costs.
In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to pay the maturity amount of RS.40, 000/- to the complainant with 9% interest from the date of maturity i.e 11.3.2001 till realization and RS. 4,000/- as compensation and RS.500 as costs. The opposite party is granted one month time for compliance of the above order, failing which the opposite party is to pay the amount with 12% interest from the date of maturity till realization.
Pronounced in the Open Court, this the 9th day of June, 2003
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER
