CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM.

Present

Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President

                                                                                                                               Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member

 

CC No 168/11

 

Tuesday the 21^st day of February, 2012

 

Petitioner                                               : Preethy Jose,

                                                                Kallivayalil,

                                                                Chettuthode, Meenachil Taluk

                                                                Residing at Kochupurackal,

                                                                Erattupetta village,               

                                                                Kaduvamoozhi.

                                                               (Adv.S. Rajesh)

 

                                                            Vs.

 

Opposite party                                      : Thidanad Grama Panchayat

                                                                 SC/ST Co-Operative Society Ltd

                                                                No.1048, Kalaketti PO, Kottayam

                                                                Rep.by its President.

                                                            2) President,

                                                                Thidanad Grama Panchayat

                                                                 SC/ST Co-Operative Society Ltd

                                                                No.1048, Kalaketti PO, Kottayam

                                                            3) Secretary,

                                                                Thidanad Grama Panchayat

                                                                 SC/ST Co-Operative Society Ltd

                                                                No.1048, Kalaketti PO, Kottayam

                                                               (Adv. Jaison Jacob)

 

 

 

            Case of the petitioner filed, on 01/07/11 is as follows:

            1^st opposite party is a service provider doing banking business. 2^nd opposite party is the President and 3^rd opposite party is the Secretary of 1^st opposite party. Petitioner on 15/10/09, as per fixed deposit No.245, deposited an amount of Rs.90,000/- and as per No.246 deposited an amount of Rs.30,000/-. Petitioner father, being petitioner as the nominee, as per receipt No.243 deposited an amount of Rs.90,000/-. All fixed deposits were matured on 15/10/2010. Father of the petitioner died on 5/11/10. So as the nominee, petitioner is entitled for the amount deposited by her father. Petitioner on several occasions demanded the fixed deposit but opposite party so far not refunded the amount with interest as agreed. Hence the petition.

            Opposite party is set expartee. As per order in IA 712/11 exparty                      order is set aside and the version is accepted. According to opposite party 1 to 3 petition is not maintainable and is to be redressed by way of arbitration as per Section 69 of Kerala Co-Operative Society Act 1969.   Amount is deposited not as a fixed deposit but as a security deposit. Petitioner is an employee of a computer centre conducted by the opposite party. Security deposit will be returned to the petitioner upon successful completion of probation. According to opposite party there is no deficiency in service on their part and they pray for dismissal of petition with their costs.

Points for determinations are:

i)                    Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

ii)                   Reliefs and costs?

Evidence in this case consists of affidavit filed by petitioner, Ext.A1 to A3 documents on the side of the petitioner.

            Petitioner produced fixed deposit receipt dtd 15/10/09 for an amount of Rs.90,000/- and another fixed deposit receipt dtd 15/10/09 for an amount of Rs.30,000/.   Fixed deposit receipt dtd 15/10/09 of Jose Michael for Rs.90,000/-is also produced.   Documents were marked as Ext.A1 to A3 respectively. From Ext.A1 to A3 document it can be seen that petitioner deposited an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- in the opposite party bank on 15/10/09 as fixed deposit. A3 document shows that father of the petitioner appointed petitioner as the nominee for the deposited Rs.90,000/-. From Ext.A1 to A3 document it can bee seen that the amount is deposited for one year and the rate of interest is 10% per annum. According to opposite party, the amount is deposited as security deposit for the employment of the petitioner in opposite party bank. Opposite party has not filed any contra evidence to prove that the amount is accepted as a security deposit. In our view withhelding fixed deposit amount of petitioner even after date of maturity amounts to deficiency in service, so point no.1 is found accordingly.

Point No.2

            In view of the findings in point No.1, petition is allowed.

            Opposite party is ordered to pay petitioner an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- with 10% interest from 15/10/09 till realisation. Opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2000/- as cost of the proceedings. Since interest is allowed no separate compensation is ordered.

            Order shall be complied with within one month of the receipt of a copy of order.

 

Dictated by me transcribed by the Confidential Assistant corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 21^st day of February, 2012.

 

Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-

Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member                    Sd/-                

 

Ext.A1-fixed deposit recipt dtd 15/10/09 for Rs.90,000/-

Ext.A2-fixed deposit receipt dtd 15/10/09 for Rs.30,000/-

Ext.A3-fixed deposit receipt dtd 15/10/09 for Rs.90,000/-.

By Order,

 

 

Senior Superintendent.