Kerala

Trissur

CC/06/610

Nisha. C. J - Complainant(s)

Versus

Villan Devassy Lonappan Memorial Education Society - Opp.Party(s)

A. D. Benny

01 Jan 2010

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
Ayyanthole , Thrissur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/06/610

Nisha. C. J
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Villan Devassy Lonappan Memorial Education Society
Shanty Pauly
Pauly Villan
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Padmini Sudheesh 2. Rajani P.S. 3. Sasidharan M.S

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Nisha. C. J

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Villan Devassy Lonappan Memorial Education Society 2. Shanty Pauly 3. Pauly Villan

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. A. D. Benny

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
2. George Kollannur



ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President
           The complainant worked as trainee in the respondents institution from 17/1/05. In order to get the training she deposited Rs.1,00,000/- in the institution on 17/1/05 itself. The respondents agreed to give 12% interest. During the training period it was agreed to give Rs.3,000/- as stipend. But the respondents committed default in payment of stipend and also in payment of interest. In some months stipend was given. Some cheques issued by the respondents towards stipend returned as funds insufficient and account closed. The given training was also not sufficient. In addition to that on 24/4/06 there was a news in Malayala Manorama newspaper that the respondents institution is cheating people by doing like this. So the complainant demanded the deposited amount. But it was not returned. Hence the complaint.
 
           2. All the respondents are called absent and set exparte.
 
           3. The complainant filed affidavit and Exhibit P1 to P5 to prove her case. 
           4. According to the complainant the respondents accepted Rupees one lakh as deposit for training in the respondents institution. It was agreed by the respondents that they will give 12% interest for the deposit and Rs.3,000/- as stipend. But these were not done by the respondents. So this complaint is filed to get back the deposited amount with interest and also compensation.   She also claims the balance amount due to her as stipend. But the duration of her training in the institution and the amount actually received by her were not explained in the complaint and no documents also produced to prove the same. So she is not entitled for that amount.
 
           5. There is no evidence to the contrary.
 
           6. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to return Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with interest at the rate of 12% from 17/1/05 till realization and compensation for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with cost Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) within a month.
 
             Dictated to the Confdl. Asst., transcriber by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 1st day of January 2010.



......................Padmini Sudheesh
......................Rajani P.S.
......................Sasidharan M.S