IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MADIKERI

SRI. C.V. MARGOOR,PRESIDENT

O R D E R

1. This complaint filed by Sri. K.A. Narayana Moorthy s/o. late Ananda Rao, resident of Kottoli House, K. Boikeri Post, Virajpet Taluk, Kodagu District against the opponents with a prayer to direct them to pay a sum of Rs.1,94,800/- which includes debenture amount, interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum, travelling expenses and cost of this proceedings.

2. The opponent no.1 is Managing Director, Sigs Financial Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Thirunakkara, Kottayam, Kerala State and opponent no.2 Agent of opponent No.1. The opponent no.1 is a Private Limited Company and appointed the 2^nd opponent as an agent to canvas for it throughout Kodagu District.  On the request of opponent no.2 that on 25/05/2012 the complainant had purchased 200 debentures of opponent no.1 company each face value of Rs.500/- for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.  The maturity of the debenture was on 25/11/2017 with interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum.  Though the debenture was matured on 25/11/2017 inspite of repeated request, demands and reminders made by the complainant the opponent no.1 has failed to refund the debenture amount with interest.  Hence this complaint.

3. The opponent no.1 has avoided the service of notice hence, the notice was published in Indian Express News Paper, Kottayam edition and despite due publication of notice the opponent no.1 did not appear hence, it was proceeded exparte.   The opponent no.2 inspite of personal service of notice failed to appear hence, he is placed exparte.

4. The complainant filed his affidavit in lieu of evidence and marked exhibits P1 to P4 documents.

5. Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the complainant and the points that would arise for determination are as under;

1. Whether the complainant proves that the act of opponent no.1 non returning of the debenture amount with interest amounts to deficiency in service?

2. To what order?

6. Our findings on the above points is as under;

• Point No.1:- In the Affirmative
• Point No.2:- As per final order for the below

R E A S O N S

7. The learned counsel for the complainant vehemently argued that the opponent no.1 inspite of the maturity period of the debentures has failed to return the same along with interest.  The complainant in the affidavit filed in lieu of evidence reiterated the averments of complaints in toto.  The complainant marked exhibit P1 debenture certificate issued by the opponent No.1.  According to this, the complainant has purchased 200 debentures face value of Rs.500/- each bearing No.29,489/- to 29,688/- total value of Rs.1,00,000/-. Exhibit P1 further indicates that maturity date is 25/11/2017 and interest rate at 12.5%.  Exhibit P2 is temporary receipt dated 25/05/2012 issued by opponent no.1 for receiving Rs.1,00,000/- and it also contained redemption date as 25/11/2017.  Exhibit P3 notice published in Indian Express daily News Paper Kottayam edition dated 08/11/2018.  It is published in exhibit P3 that the opponent required to appear before this Forum on 15/12/2018 at 11 a.m through an advocate or personally.  Exhibit P4 is advertisement bill for Rs.3,990/- issued by authorized advertising agency, Madikeri for publishing notice in exhibit P3.

8. The opponent no.1 and 2 though even after due service of notice were remained absent in this proceedings.  Exhibit P1 and P2 prove that the complainant has purchased 200 debentures on 25/05/2012 of Rs.500/- each and total face value is Rs.1,00,000/- and maturity date was on 25/11/2017.  It is the case of complainant that the opponent no.1 even after the expiry of maturity date has failed to return the debenture amount with interest.  The act of opponent falls under the definition of Unfair Trade Practice as it falsely represented the complainant that it would return the debenture amount on expiry of maturity period with interest at the rate of 12.5%.  It is evident from exhibits P1 and P2 that the conduct of opponent no.1 amounts to deficiency of service in non-returning the debenture amount with accrued interest.  Therefore, the opponents shall liable to pay Rs.1,94,000/- to the complainant which includes debenture amount of Rs.1,00,000/- interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum from 25/05/2012 till 25/12/2017 a sum of Rs.69,800/-, travelling and miscellaneous expenses to approach the opponent no.1 amounts to Rs.15,000/- and cost of this proceedings a sum of Rs.10,000/-.  In the result, we proceed to pass the following;

O R D E R

1. The complaint filed by Mr.K.A. Narayana Moorthy s/o. late Ananda Rao is allowed directing the opponent no.1 and 2 shall jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,94,800/- with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from 26/12/2017 till the date of realization.
2. It is further ordered that the opponents shall pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- cost of the notice published in the Newspaper.
3. Furnish copy of order to the complainant and opposite parties at free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this 16^th day of FEBRUARY, 2019)

                                                    (C.V. MARGOOR)

                                                          PRESIDENT 

                                                    (M.C. DEVAKUMAR)

                                                             MEMBER