BEFORE THE  DIST. CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM;  DHARWAD.

DATE: 19^th October 2015         

PRESENT:

1) Shri B.H.Shreeharsha       : President

2) Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi             : Member 

Complaint No.: 261/2015  

Complaint No.: 262/2015

Complainant/s:       Ishwar Siddappa Badiger,

Age: 66 years, Occ: Retired, R/o.Kamati Galli, Kamalapur, Dharwad.

In CC 261/2015

Shankaracharya s/o. Ramachandrappa Murty, Age: 64 years, Occ: Retired, R/o.No.33, “Ashirwad”, C-Block, Charantimath Garden,  Dharwad.

In CC 262/2015

 (By Sri.N.M.Badiger, Adv.)

v/s

Respondent/s:  1.    The President, The Karnataka Vishwabramha Sahakari Pattin Sangha Niyamita, Raviwar Peth, Dharwad.

2.     The Secretary, The Karnataka Vishwabramha Sahakari Pattin Sangha Niyamita, Raviwar Peth, Dharwad.

(Exparte)

O R D E R

By: Shri. B.H.Shreeharsha : President.

1.     Since the complaints filed by the complainants against the same respondents and as the reliefs sought are the common, for the convenience all the complaints were clubbed together and disposed in a common judgment.

2.     The complainants have filed these complaints claiming for a direction to the respondents to refund the matured FDRs amount along with interest @18% and to order for payment of compensation, cost of the proceedings and to grant such other reliefs.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

3.     The case of the complainants are that, the complainants are the retired employees of KUD. Hence for their future livelihood during their retirement period they are interested in investing their amount in financial institution to fetch higher interest as their income and invested in the respondents financial institution as detailed below :

4.     After maturity of the amount the complainants repeatedly approached and demand for refund of the amount as the said amount was in need of their urgent necessities. But the respondents on one or other pretexts assuring the complainants drag on and finally not paid the amount. Ultimately complainants thought of moving legal action against the respondents. Hence, on 07.08.2015 got issued legal notice calling upon the respondents to refund the amount. The notice sent returned unserved with a postal endorsement ‘not claimed’. Non return of the amount by the respondents amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence, the complainants filed the instant complaint praying for the relief as sought.

5.     The notice sent to the respondents returned unserved with a postal endorsement ‘ not claimed’ considering the endorsement holding sufficient service the respondents are placed exparte and exparte proceedings initiated against the respondents. 

6.     On the said pleadings the following points have arisen for consideration:

1. Whether complainant has proved that there was deficiency in service on the part of respondents ?
2. Whether complainant is entitled to the relief as claimed ?
3. To what relief the complainant is entitled ?

Complainants admit sworn to evidence affidavit, relied on documents.   Heard. Perused the records.

Finding on points is as under.

1. Affirmative 
2. Accordingly  
3. As per order

Reasons

Points 1 and 2

7.     Since the prosecution taken place exparte the contention of the complainants went unimpeached. Ex.C-4, C-4(A) & (B) reveals the complainants have invested their amount with the respondents and the FDRs have been matured. Non refund of the amount certainly amounts to deficiency in service. Since the complainants are the deposit holders and non payment links consumer and service provider relationship between the complainants and respondents and the present complaint is a consumer complaint. The complainants with appulsive evidence established their case of deficiency in service against respondents accordingly complainants are entitled for relief.

8.     In view of the above discussions we have arrived and proceed to held issue.1 and 2 in affirmative and accordingly.

9.     Point.3: In view of the finding on points 1 and 2 proceeded to pass the following 

Order

        Complaints are partly allowed. The respondent.1 and 2 are jointly and severally are directed to pay the amount of respective FDR amount to the complainants within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with Rs.1,000/- each towards compensation and Rs.1,000/- each towards cost of the proceedings. Failing to comply the same, the said amount shall carry interest @9% P.A. from thereon till realization.

        Original order be kept in CC 261/15 & its copy in CC 262/15.

(Dictated to steno, transcribed by him and edited by us and pronounced in the open Forum on this day on 19^th day of October 2015)

(Smt.M.Vijayalaxmi)                                      (Sri.B.H.Shreeharsha)

Member                                                           President

Dist.Consumer Forum                                    Dist.Consumer Forum

MSR