IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KOLLAM

Dated this the   30^th  Day of  April  2022

  Present: -  Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LL.M. President

        Smt.S.Sandhya Rani, Bsc, L.L.B,Member

                   Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

                                                    CC.227/20

1. Mathew George                                 :         Complainants

        S/o George Mathews

      Manjalloor, NTV Nagar-74

      Kadappakkada, Kollam-691008.

       Represented by the

       Power of Attorney Holder George Mathews

       Aged 66 Yrs

        -Do-

2. Abraham  George

         S/o George Mathews

         -Do-

     3.  Maymol George

          W/o George Mathews

          -Do-

[By Adv.M I Alexander Panicker]

    V/s

1.          Thomas Daniel                             :         Opposite parties

The Managing Partner

Popular Finance/Popular Traders

Indikattil House, Vakayar

Konni, Pathanamthitta-689698.

2.         Prabha Thomas

W/o Thomas Daniel

                  Partner

                 -Do-

          3.   Rinu Marium Thomas

                S/o Thomas Daniel

                Partner

                   -Do-

          4.   Ria Ann Thomas

                D/o Thomas Daniel

                Partner

                   -Do-

           5.   Reba Mary Thomas

                 D/o Thomas Daniel

                 Partner

                 -Do

FINAL  ORDER

E.M.MUHAMMED IBRAHIM , B.A, LL.M, President

1. This is a case based on a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-

The 1^st complainant is working as an Engineer and the 2^nd  complainant is working as IT professional and the 3^rd complainant is the mother of 1^st and 2^nd complainants and  is a home maker.  Opposite party No.1&2 are mutually husband and wife and opposite party No.3 to 5 are the daughters of 1^st and 2^nd opposite party couples.  All of them claimed to be partners of business firms in the name and style Popular Finance and its sister concerns especially Popular Traders.  The opposite parties had opened a branch officer of Popular Finance at the shopping complex of the St.Thomas Orthodox Cathedral, Kollam and cunningly posted a reputed person of the said Church as its Branch Manager(now he is no more).  The said Manager under his influence on parishioners and also on taking many members of the said church had trusted the opposite parties and had entrusted their savings in the said branch.  The complainants also as members of the said church were canvassed to deposit their savings on assurance that repayment will be prompt when and where required.  The complainant attracted to the wide publicity through news paper, electronic media, social media and on direct canvassing through agents and officials of the opposite parties, the complainants too were made to believe that the opposite parties are reliable and trust worthy private financiers and they are authorized and competent to receive deposits and would return the deposited amount with interest as promised. 

2. The complainants had deposited their savings and the following receipts were issued in the name Popular Traders so as to acknowledge the liability of the opposite parties to the complainant.  All the 11 accounts shown below are in their joint accounts of each other and hence all of them are entitled to recover the amount from the opposite parties.  Details of the acknowledgement of liability in the form of receipts are shown below:-

Branches of the opposite parties remained closed during Covid 19 Pandemic lock down period.  After lifting of lockdown restrictions also the functioning of the branches were restricted and to those who want to withdraw their deposits were not paid immediately and started deferring payments on lame excuses.  The complainants had also approached the concerned branch office of the opposite parties to get back their due amount after 01.05.2020.  Slowly the complainants realised that the financial institutions run by the opposite parties are being closed and customers started lodging complaints to the police and police registering cases against the opposite parties and the opposite parties absconded with an intention to flee away to foreign countries. 

3. The police had arrested all the opposite parties and investigation is going on to search and find the huge amounts they received and diverted.  Now the complainants are convinced that the opposite parties were engaged in unfair trade practices and were fraudulent to conduct financial business without proper license or permission from RBI.  The opposite parties were deliberate to mislead the public with false claims and they were deliberate to cheat customers who trusted them.  They were deliberate to receive deposits on false promises and forging documents in the name of paper firms.  They have forged and fabricated documents and misappropriated the amount entrusted to them so as to cause unlawful loss to the complainants and unlawful gain to the opposite parties.  There is deficiency in service of the opposite parties as private financiers and the opposite parties failed on their service by undertaking and promise to repay the amount with agreed rate of interest.  Total amount due as per the above 11 receipts from its w.e.f date is Rs.11,02,500/-.  The  complainants are also entitled to get the promised rate of interest 12% p.a on the whole amount from 01.05.2020.  thus totally an amount of Rs.11,02,500/- is due to the complainants from the opposite parties.  The said amount may be considered as the loss incurred to the complainants.  The complainant even before expiry of the respective periods shown in the receipts wished to get back the promised amount, but was deferred on lame excuses.  The complainant had contacted the opposite parties in person and requested to refund the entire deposit amount by closing all accounts even prematurely, but the opposite parties  were not ready to return the amount so that the loss and injury caused to the complainants can never be equated.  Hence the complaint.

          4. Notice issued from this Commission against opposite parties returned un served stating addressee left hence paper publication was effected as per IA 176/21.  The learned counsel for the complainant produced paper publication on 13.12.21.  Though opposite parties were called they remained absent.  Hence they were set exparty.  The complainant filed proof affidavit and got marked Ext.P1 to P12 documents. Heard the counsel for the complainant.  Perused the records.  Sr.George Mathews, Power of Attorney Holder of the 1^st complainant filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination by reiterating the averments in the complaint.  He further proved Ext.P1 to P12 documents which are receipts issued in the name of the complainants No.1 to 3 for various amounts ranging from 50,000 to 2,30,000/-.  The above documents are original documents indicating that the three complainants and one Neethu Sakariya has deposited various amounts on various dates during 2019 and 2020.  The deposit was seen made for 12 months and share of profit agreed was 12% p.a in all cases.  It is also clear from the available materials that the branches of the opposite parties remained closed during Covid 19 Pandemic lock down period.  After lifting of lock down restrictions also the functioning of the branches were restricted and to those who want to withdraw their deposits were not paid immediately and started deferring payments on lame excuses.  The complainants had also approached the concerned branch office of the opposite parties to get back their due amount after 01.05.2020.  Slowly the complainants realized that the financial institutions run by the opposite parties are being closed and customers started lodging complaints to the police and police registering cases against the opposite parties and the opposite parties absconded with an intention to flee away to foreign countries.  The police had arrested all the opposite parties and investigation is going on to search and find the huge amounts they received and diverted. 

5. According to the complainants they are convinced that the opposite parties were engaged in unfair trade practices and were fraudulently  conducted financial business without proper license or permission from RBI.  The opposite parties were deliberately  received deposits on false promises and forging documents in the name of paper firms.  They have forged and fabricated documents and misappropriated the amount entrusted to them so as to cause unlawful loss to the complainants and unlawful gain to the opposite parties.  There is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as they failed to repay the amount with agreed rate of interest.  The complainant even before expiry of the respective periods shown in the receipts wished to get back the promised amount, but was deferred on lame excuses.  The complainant had contacted the opposite parties in person and requested to refund the entire deposit amount by closing all accounts even prematurely, but the opposite parties were not ready to return the amount so that the complainant has sustained much mental agony apart from monitory loss.

          6. In the circumstances it is clear that the complainants No.1 to 3 are entitled to get the amount covered by receipt No.P1 to P11 along with agreed share of profit w.e.f date of deposit till the date of decree and there after they are entitled to get interest @ 9% p.a.  The complainants are also entitled to get reasonable compensation and costs of the proceedings.

          In the result complaint stands allowed directing the opposite parties No.1 to 5 to return the amount covered by Ext.P1 to P11 fixed deposit receipts along with agreed share of profit/interest from the effective date of  deposit till today and there after interest @ 9% p.a till realization.

 Opposite parties No. 1to 5 are also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization as compensation for mental agony sustained to the complainant. 

The opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs.5000/- as costs of the proceedings.

Opposite parties No.1 to 5 are directed to comply with the above directions within 45 days from today failing which the complainants are entitled to recover the same from opposite party No.1 to 5 jointly and severally and from the assets of  Popular Finance/Popular Traders.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant  Smt. Deepa.S transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the  Open Commission this the  30^th  day of  April   2022.

E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-

            S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-

            Stanly Harold:Sd/-

          Forwarded/by Order

          Senior Superintendent

INDEX  

Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:-Nil

Documents marked for the  complainant

Ext.P1:        Original Receipt No. 0563056 for Rs.50000/- of 2^nd and 3^rd complainants.

Ext.P2:        Original receipt No.0563057 for Rs.50000/- of 2^nd and 3^rd complainants.

Ext.P3:        Original  receipt No.0570595 for Rs.1,00,000/- of 2^nd and 3^rd complainants.

Ext.P4:        Original receipt No.0570596 for Rs.1,00,000/- of 3^rd  complainant.

Ext.P5:        Original receipt No.0570602 for Rs.1,00,000/- of  Mathew George and Neethu Ann.

Ext.P6:        Original receipt No.0570611 for Rs.50000/- of  Mathew George and Maymol George.

Ext.P7:        Original receipt No.0570612 for Rs.50000/- of  Mathew George and Abraham George.

Ext.P8:        Original receipt No.0570660 for Rs.1,50,000/- of  Maymol George and Neethu Zachariah.

Ext.P9:        Original receipt No.0570661 for Rs.1,72,500/- of  Maymol George and Abraham George.

Ext.P10:      Receipt No.0574358 for Rs.2,30,000/- of  Mathew George and Maymol George.

Ext.P11:      Receipt No.0586304 for Rs.50000/- of  Abraham George and Maymol George.

Ext.P12:      Power of Attorney.

Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-Nil

Documents marked for the  opposite party:-Nil

E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-

           S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-

           Stanly Harold:Sd/-

          Forwarded/by Order

         Senior Superintendent