VINIV-INC (Venus-V) V/S B.Venkatesh S/o. B.Timanna - Consumer Court Case

Karnataka

Raichur

DCFR 9/07

B.Venkatesh S/o. B.Timanna - Complainant(s)

Versus

VINIV-INC (Venus-V) - Opp.Party(s)

V.Sripad

30 Nov 2007

ORDER

DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,DC Office Compound, Sath Kacheri
consumer case(CC) No. DCFR 9/07

B.Venkatesh S/o. B.Timanna						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
M/s. VINIV-INC- (Venus-V) VINIV-INC (Venus-V)						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):

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.

ORDER

This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act against the Respondents- (1) M/s. VINIV-INC (Venus-v), by its Managing Director Mr. Srinivas Shastry Bangalore and (2) VINIV-INC branch Office Raichur by its Agent and Authorised Signatory Mr. Yadunath Kolar. The brief facts of the complaint are as under: 2. The complainant B. Venkatesh has invested a sum of Rs.42,000/- with Respondent No-1/firm through Respondent NO-2 by way of five DDs on different dates. The Respondents have given Receipt-Cum-Investment Certificates to the complainant for the said deposited amount i.e, Rs. 10,000/- dt. 07-06-04, Rs. 10,000/- dt. 09-08-04, Rs. 7,000/- dt. 07-03-05, Rs. 5,000/- dt. 07-04-05, and Rs. 10,000/- dt. 02-05-05 and agreed to pay interest thereon as shown in the Investment Certificates. On 11-07-05 the complainant gave withdrawal requisition along with copies of Receipt-Cum-Investment Certificates to Respondent No-2 and requested him to close the account and pay back/refund his entire deposited/ invested amount together with up to date interest thereon as he was in need of money for family necessities but Respondent No-2 has not shown any suitable responsibility. Subsequently he again sent requisition for withdrawal of his deposit to both the Respondents for 2nd time on 26-09-06 by Registered Post Acknowledgement Due. The complainant has not received any acknowledgement or un-served cover with postal endorsement. In the meantime the complainant came to know that the Respondents have duped the public/depositors and thus caused loss to him. The Respondents are bound to repay the deposited amount on demands together with up to date of interest as agreed upon. The act and attitude of the Respondents amount to deficiency of service. The complainant waited for a considerable time with a profound hope that the Respondents would repay his deposited amount with up to date of interest but all in vain. Finally on 16-10-06 the complainant got issued legal notice through his Advocate by RPAD. The said notice duly served on the Respondents vide postal acknowledgement. Despite the service of the said legal notice the Respondents failed and neglected to repay the deposited sum together with upto date interest. The failure of Respondents in not making of the deposited amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant has been suffering both mentally and physically as the Respondents have failed to repay his legitimate claim and he has also been put to great loss of Rs. 1,00,000/- settlement of economic crisis in the family. Hence for all these reasons he has prayed for a direction to the Respondents to refund/pay back his deposited/invested amount of Rs. 42,000/- along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization and further direction to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for mental tension, torture & harassment etc., 3. In-response to service of notice to Respondent NO-1 sent by RPAD to his present address as UTP.No. 3666 Central Prison Parapanna Agrahara Bangalore, there was no representation by Respondent NO-1 either through his authorized agent or lawyer. So Respondent NO-1 has been placed Ex-parte. Similarly the notice issued to Respondent No.2 by RPAD to his residential address Vasavi-Nagar Raichur, returned duly served as per postal acknowledgement the Respondent NO-2 remained absent when called out and so this Respondent No-2 has also been placed Ex-parte. 4. During the course of enquiry the complainant has filed his sworn affidavit by way of evidence and has got marked (9) documents at Ex.P-1 to P-9. The Respondents 1 & 2 are Ex-parte. Heard the arguments of the counsel for complainant and perused the records. The following points arise for consideration and determination:- 1.Whether the complainant proves deficiency in service by both the Respondents in not making payment of his invested/deposited amount together with agreed rate of interest in-spite of his repeated demands, as alleged? 2.Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for? 5. Our finding on the above points are as under:- 1.In the affirmative. 2.As per final order for the following REASONS POINT NO.1:- 6. It is the case of the complainant that he has invested/deposited a sum of Rs. 42,000/- with Respondents Firm by way of DD on different dates for which the Respondents have given Receipts-Cum-Certificates agreeing to repay the same with agreed rate of interest thereon as mentioned in the respective Investment Certificates. It is also his case that on 11-07-05 he gave a withdrawal requisition to the 2nd Respondent along with copies of Receipt-cum-Investment Certificates requesting to close his account and to pay back/refund his entire deposited amount with interest thereon. But the Respondents failed to repay the same. So he again sent withdrawal requisition to both the Respondents for 2nd time by RPAD which were not returned un-served with Postal endorsement. In the meantime the complainant came to know that the Respondents have duped the people/depositors. After waiting considerable time with a profound hope, finally on 16-10-06 he got issued a legal notice through his Advocate by RPAD to both the Respondents. The said legal notice was duly served on the Respondents. Despite of service of legal notice the Respondents failed to repay the deposited amount to the complainant together with interest. The Respondents are bound to repay the deposited amount on demands made by him together with interest up to date. The failure of the Respondents in not making repayment amounts to deficiency of service by the Respondents due to which he suffered both mentally and physically and put to great loss on account economic crisis in the family. 7. The complainant has filed five original Receipts-cum-Investments-Certificates dt. 07-06-04 for Rs. 10,000/-, 09-08-04 for Rs. 10,000/-, dt. 07-03-05, for Rs. 7,000/- dt. 07-04-05 for Rs. 5,000/- dt. 02-05-05 for Rs. 10,000/- in all Rs. 42,000/- which are marked at Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-5. He has also produced Copy of withdrawal requisition with RPAD dt. 26-09-06 at Ex.P-6. Office copy of legal notice dt. 16-10-06 at Ex.P-7. Postal Acknowledgement duly served by Respondent No-1 at Ex.P-8 and Postal acknowledgement duly signed by Respondent No-2 at Ex.P-9. 8. From a close perusal of Receipt-cum-Investment Certificates and withdrawal application as discussed above it amply shows that complainant has invested/deposited amount with the Respondents who had agreed to repay the same with interest as mentioned in respective Receipt-Cum-Investments-Certificates and failed to repay same with agreed interest in-spite of withdrawal application given to Respondents. As stated above in-spite of service of legal notice both the Respondents failed to repay the same which amounts to deficiency in service. Even to the notice issued to Respondent NO-1 & 2 by this Forum to their respective address returned duly served but there was no representation on their behalf and they remained absent so they have been placed ex-parte. These factors together go to show that the Respondents are deficient in service in not making payment of respective invested amount to the complainant along with agreed rate of interest and the conduct of the Respondents in remaining absent in the proceedings before this Forum in-spite of service of notice shows that for the reasons best known to them they have remained absent and therefore we hold that the complainant has proved deficiency in service by both the Respondents and so Point No-1 is answered in the affirmative. POINT NO.2:- 9. The complainant has sought for direction for refund of his deposited/invested amount of Rs. 42,000/- along with interest at 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization and for awarding compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental tension & harassment etc., together with cost of litigation. In view of our discussion and finding on point No-1 the complainant is entitled for refund of his deposited/invested amount with agreed rate of interest from the date of investment till withdrawal application filed by him. Further he is entitled to interest at 10% p.a. on the invested amount from the date of withdrawal application till realization. As regard to awarding of compensation is concerned having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above we feel justification to allow a global compensation of Rs. 5,000/- including cost of litigation. In this view of the matter we pass the following order: ORDER The complaint of the complainant is allowed in part. Both the Respondents jointly and severally shall refund the deposited amount of Rs.42,000/- to the complainant-B.Venkatesh together with agreed interest from the date of deposits till date of withdrawal application and further interest at 10% p.a. from the date of withdrawal application till realization, on invested amount. Respondents shall also to pay a global compensation of Rs. 5,000/- including cost of litigation. Both the Respondents shall comply this order within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Office to furnish certified copy of this order to both the parties forth with free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 30-11-07) Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Smt.Pratibha Rani Hiremath, Sri. Gururaj Sri. N.H. Savalagi, Member. Member. President, Dist.Forum-Raichur. Dist-Forum-Raichur Dist-Forum-Raichur.

This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act against the Respondents- (1) M/s. VINIV-INC (Venus-v), by its Managing Director Mr. Srinivas Shastry Bangalore and (2) VINIV-INC branch Office Raichur by its Agent and Authorised Signatory Mr. Yadunath Kolar. The brief facts of the complaint are as under: 2. The complainant B. Venkatesh has invested a sum of Rs.42,000/- with Respondent No-1/firm through Respondent NO-2 by way of five DDs on different dates. The Respondents have given Receipt-Cum-Investment Certificates to the complainant for the said deposited amount i.e, Rs. 10,000/- dt. 07-06-04, Rs. 10,000/- dt. 09-08-04, Rs. 7,000/- dt. 07-03-05, Rs. 5,000/- dt. 07-04-05, and Rs. 10,000/- dt. 02-05-05 and agreed to pay interest thereon as shown in the Investment Certificates. On 11-07-05 the complainant gave withdrawal requisition along with copies of Receipt-Cum-Investment Certificates to Respondent No-2 and requested him to close the account and pay back/refund his entire deposited/ invested amount together with up to date interest thereon as he was in need of money for family necessities but Respondent No-2 has not shown any suitable responsibility. Subsequently he again sent requisition for withdrawal of his deposit to both the Respondents for 2nd time on 26-09-06 by Registered Post Acknowledgement Due. The complainant has not received any acknowledgement or un-served cover with postal endorsement. In the meantime the complainant came to know that the Respondents have duped the public/depositors and thus caused loss to him. The Respondents are bound to repay the deposited amount on demands together with up to date of interest as agreed upon. The act and attitude of the Respondents amount to deficiency of service. The complainant waited for a considerable time with a profound hope that the Respondents would repay his deposited amount with up to date of interest but all in vain. Finally on 16-10-06 the complainant got issued legal notice through his Advocate by RPAD. The said notice duly served on the Respondents vide postal acknowledgement. Despite the service of the said legal notice the Respondents failed and neglected to repay the deposited sum together with upto date interest. The failure of Respondents in not making of the deposited amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant has been suffering both mentally and physically as the Respondents have failed to repay his legitimate claim and he has also been put to great loss of Rs. 1,00,000/- settlement of economic crisis in the family. Hence for all these reasons he has prayed for a direction to the Respondents to refund/pay back his deposited/invested amount of Rs. 42,000/- along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization and further direction to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for mental tension, torture & harassment etc., 3. In-response to service of notice to Respondent NO-1 sent by RPAD to his present address as UTP.No. 3666 Central Prison Parapanna Agrahara Bangalore, there was no representation by Respondent NO-1 either through his authorized agent or lawyer. So Respondent NO-1 has been placed Ex-parte. Similarly the notice issued to Respondent No.2 by RPAD to his residential address Vasavi-Nagar Raichur, returned duly served as per postal acknowledgement the Respondent NO-2 remained absent when called out and so this Respondent No-2 has also been placed Ex-parte. 4. During the course of enquiry the complainant has filed his sworn affidavit by way of evidence and has got marked (9) documents at Ex.P-1 to P-9. The Respondents 1 & 2 are Ex-parte. Heard the arguments of the counsel for complainant and perused the records. The following points arise for consideration and determination:- 1.Whether the complainant proves deficiency in service by both the Respondents in not making payment of his invested/deposited amount together with agreed rate of interest in-spite of his repeated demands, as alleged? 2.Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for? 5. Our finding on the above points are as under:- 1.In the affirmative. 2.As per final order for the following REASONS POINT NO.1:- 6. It is the case of the complainant that he has invested/deposited a sum of Rs. 42,000/- with Respondents Firm by way of DD on different dates for which the Respondents have given Receipts-Cum-Certificates agreeing to repay the same with agreed rate of interest thereon as mentioned in the respective Investment Certificates. It is also his case that on 11-07-05 he gave a withdrawal requisition to the 2nd Respondent along with copies of Receipt-cum-Investment Certificates requesting to close his account and to pay back/refund his entire deposited amount with interest thereon. But the Respondents failed to repay the same. So he again sent withdrawal requisition to both the Respondents for 2nd time by RPAD which were not returned un-served with Postal endorsement. In the meantime the complainant came to know that the Respondents have duped the people/depositors. After waiting considerable time with a profound hope, finally on 16-10-06 he got issued a legal notice through his Advocate by RPAD to both the Respondents. The said legal notice was duly served on the Respondents. Despite of service of legal notice the Respondents failed to repay the deposited amount to the complainant together with interest. The Respondents are bound to repay the deposited amount on demands made by him together with interest up to date. The failure of the Respondents in not making repayment amounts to deficiency of service by the Respondents due to which he suffered both mentally and physically and put to great loss on account economic crisis in the family. 7. The complainant has filed five original Receipts-cum-Investments-Certificates dt. 07-06-04 for Rs. 10,000/-, 09-08-04 for Rs. 10,000/-, dt. 07-03-05, for Rs. 7,000/- dt. 07-04-05 for Rs. 5,000/- dt. 02-05-05 for Rs. 10,000/- in all Rs. 42,000/- which are marked at Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-5. He has also produced Copy of withdrawal requisition with RPAD dt. 26-09-06 at Ex.P-6. Office copy of legal notice dt. 16-10-06 at Ex.P-7. Postal Acknowledgement duly served by Respondent No-1 at Ex.P-8 and Postal acknowledgement duly signed by Respondent No-2 at Ex.P-9. 8. From a close perusal of Receipt-cum-Investment Certificates and withdrawal application as discussed above it amply shows that complainant has invested/deposited amount with the Respondents who had agreed to repay the same with interest as mentioned in respective Receipt-Cum-Investments-Certificates and failed to repay same with agreed interest in-spite of withdrawal application given to Respondents. As stated above in-spite of service of legal notice both the Respondents failed to repay the same which amounts to deficiency in service. Even to the notice issued to Respondent NO-1 & 2 by this Forum to their respective address returned duly served but there was no representation on their behalf and they remained absent so they have been placed ex-parte. These factors together go to show that the Respondents are deficient in service in not making payment of respective invested amount to the complainant along with agreed rate of interest and the conduct of the Respondents in remaining absent in the proceedings before this Forum in-spite of service of notice shows that for the reasons best known to them they have remained absent and therefore we hold that the complainant has proved deficiency in service by both the Respondents and so Point No-1 is answered in the affirmative. POINT NO.2:- 9. The complainant has sought for direction for refund of his deposited/invested amount of Rs. 42,000/- along with interest at 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till realization and for awarding compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental tension & harassment etc., together with cost of litigation. In view of our discussion and finding on point No-1 the complainant is entitled for refund of his deposited/invested amount with agreed rate of interest from the date of investment till withdrawal application filed by him. Further he is entitled to interest at 10% p.a. on the invested amount from the date of withdrawal application till realization. As regard to awarding of compensation is concerned having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above we feel justification to allow a global compensation of Rs. 5,000/- including cost of litigation. In this view of the matter we pass the following order: ORDER The complaint of the complainant is allowed in part. Both the Respondents jointly and severally shall refund the deposited amount of Rs.42,000/- to the complainant-B.Venkatesh together with agreed interest from the date of deposits till date of withdrawal application and further interest at 10% p.a. from the date of withdrawal application till realization, on invested amount. Respondents shall also to pay a global compensation of Rs. 5,000/- including cost of litigation. Both the Respondents shall comply this order within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Office to furnish certified copy of this order to both the parties forth with free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 30-11-07) Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Smt.Pratibha Rani Hiremath, Sri. Gururaj Sri. N.H. Savalagi, Member. Member. President, Dist.Forum-Raichur. Dist-Forum-Raichur Dist-Forum-Raichur.