Date of Complaint : 17/06/2014

                                  Date of Disposal :08/04/2015

IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MADIKERI

  JUDGEMENT BY SRI.V.A. PATIL, PRESIDENT

O R D E R

     This complaint has been filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the opponents directing them to pay the amount of Rs.30,000/- and the appropriate compensation, which deems fit, under the circumstances of the case, alleging the deficiency of service. 

1. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant became the member of the opponent company on 24/08/2010 and as per the R.D. scheme she invested Rs.500/- per month regularly up to 06/04/2013.As the local office was closed and there was a rumor that the Head office is also not refunding the invested money, and suspecting the intention of the opponent, the complainant approached the Head office and requested for repayment of the invested amount with accrued interest.As the opponent did not care for repayment, the complainant approached this Forum, seeking the remedy for the deficiency in service and pray for refund of money with interest and compensation along with the cost of this complaint.

    

2. Notice of the complaint is served and the opponents appeared through their council and throughout the case the opponents failed to file objections.

    

3. The complainant in support of her case filed the affidavit and produced the required documents.

    

             Heard arguments and perused the documents in view of the facts and circumstances the following points arise for our consideration are;

    

4. Whether the complainant prove the deficiency in service on the part of the opponent and is entitled for the reliefs sought?

    

5. To what relief the parties are entitled?

1. Our findings on the afire said points are as follows.

    

    Point No.1:- Partly in affirmative.

    Point No.2:- As per order. 

    

2. Point No.1 :-  The complainant in the instant case has invested the R.D amount with the opponents, submitted the original certificate and in support of her case filed the affidavit contending that the local office of the opponents was closed and as per the rumor the Head Office is also not giving the invested money back, and suspecting the intention of the opponents.  The complainant approached the Head office, and asked for refund of the invested money, the opponent refused to repay the said amount with interest, which shows the deficiency in service on the part of the opponents.

    

3. Point No.2:- On perusal of the complaint and affidavit and corroborative documents we are of the opinion that the complainant established her case as made out in the complaint.  The evidence lead by the complainant remained unchallenged.  Therefore, it is clear that there is deficiency of service by the opponents.  Therefore having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the opponent is directed to pay the actual amount invested by the complainant and the interest at the rate of 16% per annum from the date of investment i.e., from 24/08/2010 till full realization and as the bond is not matured, the complainant is not entitled for bonus and the complainant is entitled for the compensation of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of this complaint.  In view of our findings we proceed to pass the following; 

    

   O R D E R

    

          The complaint is allowed in part against the opponents.

    

4. The opponent is directed to pay the sum of Rs.16,000/- (Rs.500X32 months) with interest at the rate of 16% from the date of investment i.e., 24/08/2010 till the full realization.The opponent is directed to deposit the amount within one month from the date of this order.

5. The opponent is also liable to pay the sum of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and the sum of Rs.2,000/- towards cost of this complaint and directed to deposit the same within one month, failing which the complainant is at liberty to recover the same with interest at the rate of 10% per annum until full realization.

6. If this order is violated the complainant is at liberty to proceed against the opponents as per the law provides under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

7. Issue certified copies of this order at free of cost to both the parties.

    

(Dictated to the Stenographer and got it transcribed and corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this  08^th day of APRIL  2015)