DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 06th day of January, 2023
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member
Date of Filing: 03.01.2022
CC/8/2022
- Sandeep.U
S/o V.Unnikrishnan
“Deepam”, Puduppariyaram
Palakkad – 678 731
2. V.Unnikrishnan
S/o Ramankutty Nair
“Deepam”, Puduppariyaram
Palakkad – 678 731 - Complainants
(Complainants by Adv. Venugopal G P)
Vs
The Palakkad District Co-operative
Rubber and General Marketing Society
Limited, No.P-561, Malampuzha Road
Neelikkad, Olavakkode, Palakkad – 678 002
Rep. by its secretary
(By Adv. A.V.Ravi) - Opposite party
O R D E R
By Smt. Vidya A., Member
1. Pleadings of the Complainant in brief
The complainants had deposited an amount of Rs. 2,19,828/- (Two Lakhs nineteen thousand eight hundred and twenty eight only) with the opposite party’s society on 16/06/2020. As per the FD receipt issued by the opposite party, rate of interest is 8.25% per annum and maturity date of Fixed Deposit is 13/04/2021. After the maturity date, the complainants approached the opposite party for the refund of the amount with interest, but they did not refund the amount. They are legally responsible to return the amount. The complainants issued lawyer notice to the opposite party on 11/10/2021. Eventhough they received notice on 16/10/2021, there was no response from their part and they did not comply with the demand mentioned in the notice. The acts of the opposite party in not effecting repayment of the amount with interest amounts to deficiency is service. The complainants were not in a position to meet their urgent monetary requirements because of the acts of the opposite party. The complainants suffered mental agony and monetary loss due to the inaction of the opposite party society. So this complaint is filed to direct the opposite party to refund Rs. 2,19,828/- together with interest at the rate of 8.25% till realization and to pay a compensation of Rs.1 lakh for the mental agony suffered by the complainants, pay the cost of the proceedings and such other reliefs as the Commission finds fit and proper to grant.
2. After admitting complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. The opposite party entered appearance. They filed version beyond the statutory period. So their version was rejected.
3. The main points arising for consideration in this case are:
a. Whether there is any Deficiency in service/Unfair trade practice
on the part of the opposite party?
b. Whether the complainants are entitled to the reliefs claimed?
c. Reliefs as cost and compensation.
4. 1st Complainant filed proof affidavit for and on behalf of both complainants and Exts.A1 and A2 marked. Evidence closed and heard the complainant.
5. Points 1 to 3
Complaint averment is to the effect that the complainants deposited an amount of Rs. 2,19,828/- with the opposite party on 16/06/2020. As per the Fixed Deposit receipt issued by the opposite party, maturity date of the above deposit was 13/04/2021 and rate of interest is 8.25% per annum.
6. Complainants produced the original Fixed Deposit receipt issued by the opposite party which is marked as Ext.A1. From this it is clear that due date is 13/04/2021 and rate of interest is 8.25% per annum.
7. Complainants grievance is that when they approached the opposite party after the maturity date for getting refund of the amount together with interest, they did not give the amount. The complainant issued Lawyer Notice demanding the amount. Eventhough they received the notice, the opposite party did not do anything to comply the demand in the notice. Copy of the Lawyer Notice issued to the opposite party along with acknowledgement card and postal receipt is marked as Ext.A2.
8. Eventhough the opposite party entered appearance; they filed their version beyond the statutory period. Hence version was rejected. From the evidence adduced by the complainant, it is clear that the opposite party did not return the Fixed Deposit amount along with interest even after its maturity. It amounts to clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part. The complainant would have definitely suffered mental agony and financial loss due to the acts of the opposite party. So the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant for that.
In the result, the complainant is allowed.
We direct the opposite party:
- To refund Rs. 2,19,828/- together with interest at the rate of 8.25% from 16/06/2020 till realization.
- We further direct the opposite party to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for their deficiency in service and mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.5,000/- as cost of the proceedings.
The opposite parties shall comply with the directions in this order within 45 days of receipt of this order, failing which opposite party shall pay to the complainant Rs. 250/- per month or part thereof until the date of payment in full and final settlement of this order.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 06th day of January, 2023.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K.
Member
APPENDIX
Documents marked from the side of the Complainant –
Ext.A-1: Original Fixed Deposit receipt No: 065 issued by the opposite party dated 16/06/2020.
Ext.A-2: Copy of the Lawyer Notice issued to the opposite party along with acknowledgement card and postal receipt dated 11/10/2021.
Documents marked from the side of opposite party – Nil
Witness examined from the side of the complainants – Nil
Witness examined from the side of the opposite party - Nil
Cost – Rs. 5,000/-
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they be weeded out.
