Hamdard Credit Co-operative Society
This is a discussion on Hamdard Credit Co-operative Society within the Judgments forums, part of the General Discussions category; COMPLAINANT:- Sri. B.Channabasappa S/o B Ningappa, 67 years, Landlord, #10/2, Doddapete, Davangere. ( Sri. Jagadeesh Hiremath, Advocate) V/s OPPONENT: M/s ...
- 09-12-2009, 06:58 AM #1
Hamdard Credit Co-operative Society
Sri. B.Channabasappa S/o B Ningappa,
67 years, Landlord,
( Sri. Jagadeesh Hiremath, Advocate)
M/s Hamdard Credit Co-operative Society Ltd.,
Main Branch, Narasaraja Road,
Date of filing : 02-03-2009
Date of disposal : 29-05-2009.
The complainant Sri. B. Channabasappa has filed this complaint against the opponent u/s 12 of CP Act to direct the opponent to pay a sum of Rs.1,08,668/- along with interest at 18% PA from the date of complaint till realization.
2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows.
The complainant is the member of the opponents society and he holds 10 shares worth Rs.100 each, and his membership was accepted and confirmed on 29/7/96. The complainant has deposited Rs.50,000/- in Fixed Deposit on 30/11/02 for a period of 5 years with opponent, the opponent has agreed to pay interest at 15.5% PA and that, FD receipt is at serial no.882, dt.30/11/02, and the FD matured on 29/11/07. The complainant availed loan of Rs.40,000/- on 4/2/03 on the security of the said FD amount. The complainant has made the following payments.
3. Rs.10000/- on 3/10/03, Rs.5000/- on 12/1/04, Rs.5000/- on 26/4/07, Rs.970/- on 26/4/07, Rs.10030/- on 11/5/07, Rs.5000/- on 4/6/07, and in all Rs.36000/- was paid, and there remains balance of Rs.4000/- payable by the complainant to the opponent. The complainant after maturity of the said FD has demanded for payment of the amount covered thereof and also requested to deduct Rs.4000/- + interest being the balance due by him under the loan transaction, but in vain, the opponent started dodging to pay the amount legitamately due to the complainant since 29/11/07. The op-1 is liable to pay Rs.1,08,668/- as on 2/3/09 since, the date of maturity the complainant has prayed for awarding of interest at 18% PA as damages for unauthorized use of the amount legitimately payable to him by the opponent on 29/11/07. The complainant has suffered not only mentally but also monitorily and that, the complainant is entitled to Rs.1,000/- for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses. Under the above said facts and circumstances of the case, the complainant has filed this complaint for the above said releifs.
4. In spite of service of statutory notice, the opponents remained absent, and was placed exparte.
5. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence, and produced Ex.P-1 to P-6 documents in support of his case.
6. We have heard arguments advanced by the Counsel for the complainant.
7. Now the points that arise for consideration of this forum are as follows.
1. whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opponent?
2. If so, whether the complainant is entitled to the releifs as sought for?
3. What order?
8. Our findings to the above points are as follows.
2. As entitled to the extent as stated below
3. As per order below.
9. We have gone through the averments, and the allegations made in the complaint, affidavit evidence and also the documents produced by the complainant in support of his case.
10. In the case inspite of service of notice, the opponents remained absent, and was placed expartae. The evidence given by the PW-1 is remained unchallenged and un rebutted. We have no reason to disbelieve the evidence given by the PW-1, as the affidavit evidence filed by the complainant and averments and the allegations made in the complaint. Nothing prevented the opponent or any of its representative to appear befrore this forum and to contest the matter.
From the evidence given by PW-1, it is found that, the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.50000/- in FD of op-1 on 30/11/02 for a period of 5 years, and the op has agreed to pay interest at 15.5% PA. It is also clear from the affidavit evidence of the complainant that the opponent society has issued FD receipt bearing no.882, dt.30/11/02 and the said FD matured on 29/11/07. The complainant has produced the FD receipt dt.29/11/07. It is clear from this FD receipt at Ex.P-2 that, the said FD receipt was issued on 30/11/02 and matured on 29/11/07. It is also clear from this Ex.P-2 that, the opponents society had agreed to pay interest at 15.5%. The complainant has produced Ex.P-1 passbook.
11. The complainant has produced Ex.P-3 shares Capital issued by the opponent society mentioned as Rs.1,000/-. It is clear from Ex.P-4 that, the complainant has got issued legal notice on 6/12/08 to the opponent calling upon the opponent to pay the entire maturity value fo the FD and share capital amount and balance amount of his passbook, etc. to the complainant. The said notice got issued by the complainant was returned duly served on President and Secretary.
They are at Ex.P-5 and P-6. It is clear from the affidavit evidence of complainant that, the opponent neither replied nor complied with the notice demands. It is clear from the affidavit evidence of complainant that, the complainant had taken a loan of Rs.40000/- on 4/2/03 on the FD receipt. It is clear from the affidavit evidence of complainant that, the complainant has totally paid a sum of Rs.36000/- leaving the balance of Rs.4000/-. In order to establish the said fact, the complainant has produced passbook at Ex.P-1. It is clear from the affidavit evidence of PW-1 that, the opponent unnecessarily caused mental agony to the complainant due to non-making of payment. When the said FD is matured, then it is the bounden duty of the opponent to pay the maturity value of the said FD. Further, the opponent is bound to return the share capital amount and the balance amount to the complainant. From the office copy of the legal notice it is clear that, in spite of issue of notice, the opponent has not paid any amount and has not given any reply. Even after non-paying of the FD amount and share capital amount is nothing but deficency of service on the part of the op. We have no reason to disbeleive the evidence given by the PW-1 as the evidence given by is fully supported by documentary evidence.
12. On going through the affidavit evidence, it is clear that, the complainant has claimed the total compensation of Rs.1,25,932/-, who after deducting the balance of loan amount of Rs.4,000/- together with the interest at 17.5% PA, the opponent is liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,08,668/- to the complainant. Now the complainant has claimed principal amount of Rs.50,000/- and interest at 15.5 PA of Rs.50,000/- from 30/11/02 to 29/11/07 at Rs.50,352/- and interest at 18% PA on Rs.1,00,352/- from 29/11/07 to 2/3/09 at Rs.22,580/- and damages for monitory loss, legal injury mental agony at Rs.1,000/- and Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses, totally sum of Rs.1,25,932/- less Rs.4,000/- and interest at 17.5% i.e. Rs.13,264/- payable by the complainant towards balance loan. Totally the complainant has claimed a sum of Rs.1,08,668/-. Now the interest claimed by the complainant at 18% from 29/11/07 to 2/3/09 is highly excessive and exorbitant. As per the FD receipts itself, the opponent had agreed to pay interest 17.5% PA of Rs.50,000/-.
13. Therefore, we feel it just and proper to award interest at 10% PA on Rs.1,00,352/- from 29/11/07 to 2/3/09 at 10% PA from the date of filing of this complaint till realization.
14. Further, the compensation claimed by the complainant for deficiency in service, mental agony at Rs.1,000/- and litigation expenses at Rs.1,000/- appears to be reasonable. However, the notice charges claimed separately by the complainant at Rs.1,000/- is highly excessive, that has to be rejected. From the oral as well as documentary evidence, the complainant has satisfactorily and sufficiently established that, there is clear cut deficiency of service on the part of the OP. Under the above said circumstances, of the case, the ends of justice would be adequately met with if the above said compensation is awarded to the complainant.
15. Accordingly, we answer point no.1in Affirmative, point no.2 as entitled to the extent as stated below.
16. Point no.3:-
In view of our findings on point no.1 and 2, the complaint filed by the complainant against the opponent has to be allowed in part.
In the result we pass the following.
: O R D E R :
o The complaint filed by the complainant against the Opponent is partly allowed.
o The Opponent is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,352/- together with interest at 10% per annum, with effect from 29/11/07 till realization.
o Further the Opponent is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- for deficiency in service and for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses .