Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/197/2015

Ujwala K Deshpande - Complainant(s)

Versus

The President, Mahantesh Co-operative Credit Society Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

A G Datar

19 May 2017

ORDER

                 

ADDITIONAL  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BELAGAVI

C.C.No.197/2015

 

                     Date of filing: 06/04/2015

 

                                                                  Date of disposal: 19/05/2017

 

P R E S E N T :-

 

	(1)	Shri. A.G.Maldar, B.Com,LL.B. (Spl.) President.
	(2)	Smt.J.S. Kajagar, B.Sc. LLB. (Spl.)  Lady Member.

   

 

COMPLAINANT      -

Smt. Ujwala Krishna Deshpande, Age : 5 Years, Occ: Service, R/o: HOD, Rural Ayurvedic Medical College, Auto Nagar, Belagavi.                 (Rep. by Miss.G.M.Ammanagi, Adv.)

- V/S -

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES

1.             2.         3.

The President, Mahantesh Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., Mahantesh Nagar, Belagavi.                         (Rep. by Shri.S.I.Tigadi, Adv.)   The Secretary, Mahantesh Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., Mahantesh Nagar, Belagavi.                         (Rep. by Shri.S.R.Sakri, Adv.)   The Manager, Mahantesh Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., Mahantesh Nagar, Belagavi.                               ( Op.No.3 dismissed as per                                   order dtd: 24.06.2015)

JUDGEMENT

 

By  Sri.A.G. Maldar, President.

 

 

1.      This is a Complaint filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after referred to as Act) against the Opposite Parties (in short the “Ops”) directed to make the payment of fixed deposit amount alongwith interest @10% p.a. from the date of FD till realization and after maturity with interest @ 18% p.a. till complete realization and Rs.25,000/- towards damages and any other reliefs.

 

2.      The facts of the case in brief are that;

 

          It is case of the complainant that, the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.55,417/- under FDR No.10337 under Account No.2053 on 20.03.2010/14.12.2008 for a period of 16 months i.e. 14.12.2008 to 14.04.2010 with interests @ 10 % p.a. and further contended that, after the maturity period, the complainant requested the Ops to refund/release his F.D. amount but, the OPs society postponed the same by giving one or the other reasons, without valid reason. Finally, the complainant has got issued a legal notice to the Ops on dtd: 27.01.2015 through her counsel and the said notice is duly served to the Ops. But, the Ops did not reply to the said notice. Hence, the Ops have failed to comply with the said notice thereby there is deficiency of service on the part of Ops as contemplated under the provisions of the C.P. Act, 1986. Hence, the complainant has constrained to file this complaint.  

 

3.      The complainant has filed an application U/s. 24 (A) of the C.P. Act and the same has been allowed and the delay has been condoned at the stage of admission itself by this Forum on dtd: 15.04.2015 as delay is condoned by allowing the I.A.-I.

 

4.      After issue of notice to the Opponents. The Op.No.1 has appeared through his Counsel and resisted the claim of the complainant by filing his written version and also the Op.No.2 has appeared through his counsel and resisted the claim of the complainant by filing his written version.

 

The OP.No.1 has filed his written version and contended that, the claim of the complainant is false, frivolous and vexatious. The Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as such the complaint is time barred and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP.No.1 as such the complaint deserves to be dismissed as not maintainable and further contented that, the transaction has not taken place during the period of this OP.No.1. Therefore, the OP.No.1 is not at all liable to the said transaction and this the OP.No.1 has resigned to the said post on 5/10/2013 and all other directors have also resigned to their respective post. Therefore the Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative Society Belagavi has made enquiry and found that, there is no majority in the management Committee and passed an order on 19/5/2015 and appointed and administrative officer. Therefore, the OP.No.1 has prays to dismiss the complaint against him as the same is not maintainable.

 

The OP.No.2 has appeared and filed his written version and contended that, it is admitted fact that, the complainant had invested amounts in the Mahantesh Cash Certificate, under the F.D. scheme and further Op.No.2 contended that, the complainant is not entitled to any interests after the maturity of said F.D. as neither the deposit is being discharged nor the same is renewed and further the complainant has not approached to the Ops society and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.No.2  and therefore, the OP.No.2 prayed to dismiss the complaint.

 

 5.     Both the parties have filed their affidavits in lieu of evidence in support of their case. On behalf of complainant has produced Original F.D. receipt, Office copy of legal notice, Postal Acknowledgement and receipts, which are marked as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-4, on behalf of Op.No.1 has filed Xerox copy of resignation letter and Attested copy of Newly Elected Management Committee copy, which are marked as Ex.R-1 and Ex.R-2, for sake of our convenience we have marked P & R series. Heard the argument on both sides.

 

Now, the following points that arise for our consideration in deciding the case are;

 

 

 

01.Whether the complainant has prove that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs for not settling/refunding the payment of F.D amount?

 

02. What order?

 

6.      Our findings on the above points are as fallows;

 

 

 

01. Point No.1  in the Partly Affirmative.

02. As per final Order.

 

 

R E A S O N S :-

 

7.      Point No.1:  We have gone through the pleadings, evidence of complainant and as well as documents on records. It is important to note that, the complainant has kept F.D. amount of  Rs.55,417/- under F.D.R.No.10337  on dtd: 14.12.2008  for a period of 16 months (14.12.2008 to 14.04.2010) with interest @10% p.a for that, the Ops have issued F.D. receipt to the complainant, the said Original F.D. receipt which is  marked as Ex.P-1 and  the same is produced before this Forum, which is already marked.

The complainant contended that, several times approached the OPs and requested to refund the above said amount, but the OPs society failed to pay the above said amount, the attitude of the Ops, it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Ops.

 

The case of the OP.No.1 that, he is not the President of the society at the time of depositing the amount in the F.D.R. and that he is resigned on dtd: 5/10/2013 the copy of the same produced which is marked as Ex.R-1 and that, the D.R.C.S. Belagavi after enquiry pass the order on 19/5/2015 appointing administrative officer, the same has been substantiated by the OP.No.1 and the OP.No.1 has produced the noterised copy of D.R.C.S. on 19/5/2015 which is marked as Ex.R-2, it is crystal clear that, at serial No.1 to 7 at page No.2 in the column, the name of the OP.No.1 and other directors are appearing and the names appearing the said column the written is in Kannada as “gÁf£ÁªÉÄ ¸À°è¹zÀݪÀgÀ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ºÀÄzÉÝ”. Therefore, we are of the views that, the OP.No.1 and other directors have resigned from their post as President, Vice President and Members on 5/10/2013 and the same have been ordered. By this we can make out that during the period of deposit that is in the year 2008, the OP.No.1 is not the President and other directors were not the, Vice President and Members of the OP society nor on the perusal of the F.D. receipts we notice that, there appears any signature of the OP.No.1 on F.D. receipt. The signatures appearing on the F.D. receipt under president head are different from one signature of OP.No.1 on the Vakalat filed by counsel for OP.No.1. Therefore we are of the opinion that, during the time of deposit the OP.No.1 is not the president of the OP society. So, the OP.No.1 has established that, he has resigned from the post and there is not the President way back in the year 2008. It is important to note that, complainant has failed to established against OP.No.1, he is President of the society at the time of deposit by producing cogent and reliable and acceptable evidence as alleged in the complaint. Hence, the contention of complainant is not acceptable as alleged and the contention of Op.No.1 is acceptable and has got merit.  

 

In the above observation, we are of the opinion that, the OP.No.1 has not the president during the time of deposit and he has resigned from the  post in the year 2013. Hence, the OP.No.1 is not liable to answer the claim of the complainant and there is no deficiency of service on the part of OP.No.1. Therefore we dismissed the complaint against OP.No.1.

 

On perusal contents of the affidavit and documents produced by the complainant and facts clearly established that, the OP.No.2 act amounts to deficiency in service. Complainant has proved his case. 

 

It is a duty of the OP.No.2 that, after the maturity of F.D. amount a mandatory duty on the part of OP.No.2 to disburse or settle the F.D. amount by giving the make good payment which was fixed by the complainant in Op society, but the OP.No.2 failed to pay F.D. maturity amount one or the other reason dragging and alleging untenable contention it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of OP.No.2. 

 

The complainant has claimed an amount of Rs.55,417/-  as per FD receipt, it is evident from the document which is already marked as Ex.P-1. Therefore, the complainant is entitled for F.D. receipt amount of Rs.55,417/- with interest as per agreed rate from 14.12.2008 to 14.04.2010 under F.D. A/c No.10337 and further the Op.No.2 shall pay interest on matured amount @ 6% P.A. from the date of legal notice i.e. 27.01.2015 till realization. Hence, due to non-payment of F.D. matured amount by the OP.No.2 is caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. In our considered opinion by looking to above observation made that, it is just and proper to award a compensation of Rs.2,000/- for inconvenience and mental agony. Added to this we also award litigation expenses of Rs.1,000/-. Hence, we answer to Point No.1 in partly affirmative. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following;

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

O R D E R

 

For the reasons discussed above, the complaint filed by the complainant U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is hereby partly allowed with costs and Complaint against Op.No.1 is dismissed.

 

The OP.No.2 is hereby directed to pay the matured fixed deposited amount of Rs.55,417/- with interest as per agreed rate from 14.12.2008 to 14.04.2010 under F.D. A/c. No.10337 to the complainant and further the OP.No.2 shall pay interest on matured amount @ 6 % P.A. from the date of legal notice i.e. on 27.01.2015 till realization.

 

Further, the OP.No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/-  towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/-  being the cost of the litigation to the Complainant.

 

          The order shall be complied within 10 weeks from the date of this order, failing to which the complainant is entitled to recover additional interest @ 2 % p.a. from the date of complaint i.e. 06.04.2015 till its realization.

         

            (This order is dictated to the Stenographer, transcript edited, corrected and then pronounced in the open forum on this 19^th day of May, 2017).

 

Sri. A.G.Maldar,     President.

Smt. J.S. Kajagar,    Lady Member.