Date of Filing:14.10.2008<br /> Date of Order:31.12.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2221 OF 2008<br /> <br /> N. Murugendrappa &<br /> N.M. Gowaramma,<br /> W/o N. Murugendrappa,<br /> No. 64, K.V. Extn., I Main,<br /> New Police Station Road, <br /> K.R. Puram, Bangalore-36. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> 1. The Registrar/The Executive Officer,<br /> 17-24, Vittal Rao Nagar,<br /> Karvy Computershares Pvt. Ltd., <br /> Unit Reliance Power,<br /> Madhupur,<br /> Hyderabad-500 081,<br /> Andhra Pradesh.<br /> <br /> 2. M/s Karvy Computershares Pvt. Ltd.,<br /> S. Puttanna Road, <br /> Basavanagudi, Bangalore 24. Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant claiming compensation and damages of Rs.8,300/-. <br /> The brief facts of the case are that, the complainant applied for Reliance Power Public issue shares in the name of his wife Smt. Gowaramma along with cheque for Rs.24,950-00 to the agent M/s Bonanza Fortfolio Ltd., Bangalore. He did not receive any intimation of allotment of shares or refund advice even after one month of closure of IPO date i.e., at the end of February-2008. On personal visits to the opposite party No.1, they told to contact opposite party No.2. But he did not get any information from the opposite party No.2. They told him to produce Bank statement to prove that the amount is debited from the Bank Account and cheque is encashed by them. All the documents were submitted to opposite party No.2 vide letter dated 25/4/2008. He also sent reminder dated 12/5/2008 and 31/5/2008. But he did not get the refund amount. Finally the complainant sent letter to the opposite party No.1 on 21/6/2008 enclosing the copies of earlier communications and documents. The complainant received the refund amount cheque dated 31/7/2008 for part of the amount claimed. The over draft interest amount plus expenses incurred for getting the refund for 6 ½ months i.e, Rs.2,300/- has not been paid by opposite parties. They retained his amount of Rs. 24,150/- with them for 6 ½ months and causing hardship. This is a clear case of dis-service and not responsive and negligence on the part of opposite parties. <br /> <br /> 2. Notice issued to opposite parties. Representative of opposite parties present and submitted version stating that they were unable to process the application as banker has not provided the data on time. The opposite party had issued refund order bearing No.2422332 for Rs.25,875/- to his registered address and the refund order has been encashed by Murugendrappa. Opposite party is not at fault in any way. Delay is occurred on account of wrong data provided by the banker and opposite party requested to close the issue without any cost. <br /> 3. Arguments are heard.<br /> 4. Perused the documents, complaint and version. It is an admitted case of the parties that the complainant had applied for reliance power public issue shares along with application. He has sent cheque for Rs.24,150/- and it is also an admitted fact that complainant was not a successful allottee and shares were not allotted. The complainant states that he did not get any information from the opposite party when contacted on phone and visited in office personally. He had also sent reminder letters and this also did not help to get the refund of the amount. He had sent copy of the documents and requested for refund advice for the amount debited in his account. He had also sent letter to Executive Officer. Ultimately the complainant received refund order bearing 2422332 for Rs.24,150/- from the opposite party on 31/7/2008. It is the case of the complainant that he has not received over draft interest amount for 6 ½ months amounting to Rs.2,300/-. The opposite parties have retained complainant’s amount of Rs.24,150/- for 6 ½ months. It caused him hardship, inconvenience and loss of interest. The complainant has claimed Rs.2,300/- towards interest. The delay in sending the refund order is definitely a deficiency in service. This is an age of Science and Technology and Computers, the opposite parties could not have taken more than 6 months time in sending refund order since shares were not allotted to him. The opposite parties in the version stated that it has sent a refund order bearing No.2422332 for Rs.25,875/- on 30th June-2008 to the registered address. This is apparently false. The complainant has produced refund order No.2422332. This is for Rs.24,150/- only and not for Rs.25,875/- as stated by the opposite parties in the defense version. The defense version cannot depict the correct figure of the refund order sent to the complainant. By the refund order received by the complainant it is clear that the complainant got refund only of Rs.24,150/- the amount paid by him. This amount does not include interest for delayed refund. Therefore, the complainant is definitely entitled for interest on his amount since the opposite parties have made 6 months delay in sending the refund order. In the defense version the opposite party has stated that the refund order for Rs.25,875/- was sent, itself goes to show that the opposite party is liable to pay interest for the delayed payment. Since the refund order sent is only for Rs.24,150/-, admittedly the opposite party has to pay the interest amount. It is unfortunate that most of the time consumers are taken for a ride, the service providers are not providing prompt and efficient service. The complainant was denied of opportunity to invest his amount in any other field for about 6 months. For delayed payment it resulted hardship, inconvenience, mental tension and loss of his time and energy in making several correspondence and visits to the opposite party. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.1,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings. In this way it would be just, fair and reasonable to direct the opposite parties to pay total sum of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 5. The Complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (as global compensation) within 30 days from the date of this order.<br /> 6. The opposite parties are directed to send the D.D/Pay order directly to the opposite party with intimation to this Forum. <br /> 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately as a statutory requirement. <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 31ST DAY OF DECEMMBER 2008. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br /> <br /> Rhr.<br />