Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/518/2014

Appanna I Magadum - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Secertary/Manager Of Pragati Cr Scty Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

R D Patil

29 Feb 2016

ORDER

(Order dictated by Shri. B.V.Gudli, President)

          U/s. 12 of the C.P. Act, the complainant has filed the complaint against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service of non payment of the matured F.D.R. amount.

          2) O.Ps. in their version denied the deficiency in service and submitted complainant never approached O.P. society, the complainant is member of opponent society, as per the Section 35 of KSS Act 1997 enumerates enquiry against the Co-Operative society powers are vested with the Registrar. The Registrar has power to conduct the enquiry regarding matter touching the business of the co-operative society. Such powers are not vested with this Hon’ble Forum under the consumer protection Act. Hence the present petition is liable to be dismissed.

          3) To prove the claim, the complainant has filed affidavit and produced original F.D.R. and O.Ps. have filed their affidavit.

          4) We have heard the arguments and perused the records.

          5) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and entitled to the reliefs sought?

          6) Our finding on the point is partly in affirmative, for the following reasons.

:: R E A S O N S ::

          7) On perusal contents of the complaint and affidavit filed by the complainant. The complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.30,000/- under Cash Pragati Certificate No.000509 on 16/3/2006 and its Account No.1309, L.F. No.42-5 and same has matured on 17/03/2013.

          8) After maturity the complainant approached on 17/3/2013 and sought for return maturity F.D. amount, but the opponents stated that much of cash is not available at that point of time and they asked complainant to come after few days. After some days again the complainant approached opponents. Opponents failed to make the payment of maturity amount. In-spite of approaching opponents have not paid F.D. maturity amount to the complainant and thereby committed deficiency in service. Hence complainant constrained to file this complaint against opponents.

          9) On perusal objection filed by the opponents. The opponents have admitted that complainant had kept an amount Rs.30,000/- in their society on 16/3/2006 and same has been matured on 17/3/2013, but immediately after the maturity of the amount the complainant has not visited and has not produced original F.D. receipt and not filed withdrawal voucher to get release the maturity amount and has kept mum for more than a year only to grab the interest with the malafide intention and further contended that this Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction to try and entertain this complaint as the complainant has to exhaust his remedy under Karnataka Co-Op. Souharda Act if there is any dispute between the members and the society concerned has to file dispute before the Registrar of Co-Op. Souharda Act as per the provisions. This Hon’ble forum no jurisdiction. Hence prays for dismiss the complaint.

          10) On perusal contends of the complaint and evidence affidavit and documents produced by the complainant that F.D.R is standing in the name of the complainant which was matured on 17/3/2013. On perusal objection filed by the opponents they have admitted that complainant had deposited amount of Rs.30,000/- dated 16/3/2006 and matured on 17/3/2013.

          11) On perusal contents of the complainant after maturity the complainant has approached to opponents. Opponents have not paid the maturity amount its amounts to deficiency in service, even after maturity and repeated request made by the complainant the opponents have not paid the maturity F.D. amount.

          12) The opponents have taken contention in their objection that the complainant is a member of the opponents society if there is any dispute between member and society concerned has to file dispute before Registrar of Co-Op. Souharda Act as per the provisions. The said contention that member cannot maintain the complaint to this fact that the member has no right to claim against society. The opponents have not produced any byalaws or rules and regulations to show that the member cannot maintain the complaint before the forum.

13)    On perusal contents of the affidavit and admission made by the opponents. The opponents have not paid the complainant deposited amount of Rs.30,000/- on 16/3/2006 and same had matured on 17/3/2013. In-spite of that opponents failed to pay the F.D. amount in favour of the complainant. Hence deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. have been proved.

14) Taking into consideration of the facts, evidence on record and the discussion made here before deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. have been proved.

15) Taking in to consideration of various aspects and the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (2011) SCCR 268 as well as Hon’ble Apex Commission in a ruling reported in 2013 (2) CPR 574 as well as the purpose and object of the Act, absolutely it is just and necessary to impose heavy cost on daily basis if order remains uncomplied within period fixed for compliance of the order, so as to have feeling and pinch.

          16) Accordingly, following order.

ORDER

          Complaint is partly allowed.

          The O.Ps. represented by the Secretary/Manager and Chairman jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.60,000/- in respect of F.D.R. No.000509 with future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from 18/3/2013 till realization of the entire amount.

          Further, the O.Ps. represented by the Secretary/Manager and Chairman jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards costs of the proceedings.

          The order shall be complied by the O.Ps. within 30 days from the date of the order.

          If the order is not complied within 30 days the O.Ps. represented by the Chairman and Secretary/Manger jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50/- per day till compliance of the order.

(Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 29^th day of February 2016).

           Member                   Member                   President.

gm*