Complaint filed on: 30-03-2023
Disposed on: 14-06-2023
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU
DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF JUNE, 2023
PRESENT
SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, B.Com., LLM., PRESIDENT
SRI.KUMARA.N, B.Sc. (Agri), LLB., MBA., MEMBER
SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., LLB. (Spl)., LADY MEMBER
CC.No.47/2023
Sri,Ravikumara L.N. S/o Narasimhamurthy,
Lakkenahalli, Nagavalli Hobli,
Tumakuru Taluk, Tumakuru, Karnataka.
……………….Complainant/s
(In person)
V/s
Tumakuru Navanidhi Souhardha Co-Operative
Society Limited, Haripriya Hights, 2nd Floor,
Melekote Main Road, Tumakuru Karnataka.
……………….Opposite Party/s
(By Sri. Ravikumar, Adv.,)
:ORDER:
BY SRI.KUMARA.N., MEMBER
This complaint was filed by the complainant U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, with a prayer to direct the OP to pay pigmy amount Rs.26,800/- along with interest and Rs.25,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses.
2. In this case, opposite party is / was, Tumakuru Navanidhi Souhardha Co-Operative Society Limited, Haripriya Hights, 2nd Floor, Melekote Main Road, Tumakuru Karnataka, (herein after called as the OP).
3. It’s the case of the complaint, that the complainant was the member of the OP and depositing daily a savings of Rs.200/- to the OP (Pigmy account No 260) since 15-10-2020, out of his earnings though pigmy agent Sri.Anilkumar .V. It is further submitted that other than the pigmy account No.260, the complainant having other two pigmy account bearing Nos.26 & 143 with the OP, and these two were settled along with interest as per norms by the OP. The complainant further submitted that due to financial crises, the complainant approached the OP and requested to settle the pigmy amount of Rs.26,800/- along with interest which was accrued in pigmy account No.260, The OP did not pay the amount in spite of several requests and even after issued request letter on 06.03.2023, Hence, this complaint,
4. After the case registered, the commission notice issued to OP, in turn the OP appeared through its counsel and filed the version and admitted the facts that, the complainant was a member of OP, having 03 pigmy account i.e., 26, 143 & 260, out of which, the OP settled and paid the amount along with interest to the complainant in all 3 pigmy account, i.e. Rs.26,000/- on 25.01.2020 under pigmy account No.26, Rs.16,300/- on 15.10.2020 under pigmy account No.143 and Rs.26,800/- on 11.12.2021 under pigmy account No.260. The OP further contended that, the complainant working under one of the EX director of the OP, who was removed from the board by the OP, as per his direction with bad intention, the complainant making false allegations against the OP, and filed this complaint to harass the OP, On these among other grounds, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost.
5. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence. The complainant produced copies of documents. Binu A.K. President of OP filed affidavit evidence on behalf of OP. The OP’s counsel marked the documents at Ex.R1 to R8(a).
6. We have heard the arguments from complainant in person and counsel for OP.
7. The points that would arise for determination are as here under:
1) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency in service on the part of OP?
2) Is complainant entitled to the reliefs sought for?
8. Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:
Point No.1: In the negative
Point No.2: In negative for the below
:R E A S O N S:
Point Nos.(1) & (2):-
9. The complainant in person argued that, the OP not settled the pigmy amount of Rs 26,800.00, in pigmy account NO 260, inspite of several requests. The complainant further submitted that the OP , by doing forgery of his, signature, created documents, showing that, an amount of Rs 26800.00 in pigmy account paid to the complainant and settled on 11-12-2021.The complainant prayed to allow the case and award compensation. The Complainant produced copy of his request letter to Op, dated 06-03-2022, postal receipts, copy of the Pigmy opening application, and copy of office Note, where in on 11-12-2021, the OP processed the pigmy account and paid the cash of Rs 26800.00 to the complainant, complainant and CEO signed. as a Pigmy account no 260 settled to the complainant.
10. The OP counsel argued that, complainant having three pigmy accounts with the OP, i.e., pigmy account No 26, 143 & 260, the OP promptly settled and paid the amount along with interest to the complainant in all 3 pigmy account, i.e. Rs.26,000/- on 25.01.2020 under pigmy account No.26, Rs.16,300/- on 15.10.2020 under pigmy account No.143 and Rs.26,800/- on 11.12.2021 under pigmy account No.260. Now the complainant making false allegation, that the OP by doing forgery of his, signature created false documents of Rs.26,800/- on 11.12.2021 under pigmy account No.260, if so why the complainant not lodged forgery complaint against the OP since from 11-12-2021. It’s a bad intention of the complainant, to create bad name to the OP in the society filed this complaint, hence prayed to dismiss the case with cost. The OP counsel produced copy of the Pigmy opening application (Ex R 1), and copy of office Note, where in on 11-12-2021, the OP processed the pigmy account (Ex R 2) and paid the cash of Rs 26800.00 to the complainant, complainant and CEO signed, as a Pigmy account no 260 settled to the complainant (Ex R 3), copy of office Note, where in on 25-01-2020, the OP processed the pigmy account (Ex R 4) and paid the cash of Rs 26000.00 to the complainant pertaining to pigmy account No 26, copy of office Note, where in on 15-10-2020, the OP processed the pigmy account (Ex R 5) and paid the cash of Rs.16,300.00 to the complainant pertaining to pigmy account No 143, and Ex R.6, Ex.R7 & Ex.R8 were cash paid receipts of OP to the complainant for Rs.26,000.00, Rs.16,300.00 & 26,800.00, on 25-01-2020, 15-10-2020 & 10-12-2021 pertaining to pigmy account No 26, 143, and 260 respectively.
11. Honorable NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI, in the case of, Capital Charitable & Education vs Axis Bank Limited on 9 December, 2019, ordered that, It has been already found that this Commission cannot entertain this remaining complaint where the allegations are based on fraud and forgery. Accordingly, the remaining complaint is dismissed as not maintainable before this Commission.
12. A bench comprising justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi, in The Honorable Supreme court of India, on 27 March, 2023, in the case of, C.M.D.,City Union Bank Limited . vs R.Chandramohan,in Para 12 held that, The proceedings before the Commission being summary in nature, the complaints involving highly disputed questions of facts or the cases involving tortious acts or criminality like fraud or cheating, could not be decided by the Forum/Commission.
13. In this case, the complainant, in the complaint stated that, he paid his daily saving amount of Rs 200.00 towards pigmy account to Sri,V. Anil Kumar, who was pigmy collector of the OP, but the complainant not impleded Sri,V. Anil Kumar, pigmy collector of OP as a necessary party to the case.
14. In the above case, there was a dispute on the signature of the complainant, while disbursing or settling the pigmy account No.260 for Rs 26,800.00. The complainant allegation on FRAUD action against the OP, by considering Para 9 & 10, 11 and 12 of the above, we proceed to pass the following;
:O R D E R:
The complaint is dismissed without cost.
The complainant is free to get relief with respect to the FRAUD happened, by approaching suitable court or authority.
Furnish the copy of order to the complainant and opposite party at free of cost.
