IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 30th day of December 2017.
Filed on 31/08/2017
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George, President
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No. 239/2017
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:
Sarath Chandrika 1. M/s.Vidoba Bankers,
W/oSreekanth Shenoy K.P.V/72,Thanki Junction,
8/167,T.D.West Gate, Kadakarapally. P.O,
Mattancherry.P.O Cherthala.
Rep. by Power of Attorny Holder Represented by Managing
K.Muraleedharan @ Muraleedhar Partner,Narasimha Pai,
S/oKrishna Sheno Muraleedhar S/oBabula Pai(late)
-do- -do- Vayalapuram Veedu, (By Adv. N. Ratheesh) Thirumalabhagam.P.O. Thuravoor, Cherthala-688 540.2
2. Smt. Sandhya
W/o Dileepkumar (late), Vidoba
Mandir, Thirumalabhagom PO.
Thuravoor, Cherthala 688540
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant is a depositor with the first opposite party firm. The deceased Dileepkumar was the Managing Partner of the firm. The Managing Partner approached the complainant and requested to deposit amount with them and he offered attractive rate of interest to the complainants and thereby induced the complainant to deposit Rs. 3,00,000/- for the period of 3 years @ of 12% interest. The said Dileepkumar was died on 31-01-2014. There after the complainant had on several occasions approached the opposite parties to return the amount covered under aforesaid fixed receipts together with agreed rate of interest however, they denied the assured service on the part of the opposite parties, and they are liable to compensate the same also. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties the complaint is filed.
2. Notice issued against opposite parties served but they did not turn up. Hence they were set ex-parte.
3. The complainant filed proof affidavit along with documents. The document produced was marked as Ext. A1to A3. No oral or documentary evidence adduced from the part of the opposite parties.
4. The points for consideration are:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite
parties?
2) If so the reliefs and costs?
5. According to the complainant, they deposited with the firm an amount of Rs 3,00,000/- on 20-04-2013 as per receipt No2550.In order to prove that he has produced Fixed Deposit No.975/061/2013 dated:20-04-2013 which marked as Exbt.A1. The further allegation of the complainant is that the opposite parties failed to return the said amounts to the complainant after the maturity date. It has not been denied by the opposite parties that the amounts in question were not deposited by the complainant with the firm of which the first opposite party and the deceased Dileepkumar were the partners. The affidavit filed by the complaint not challenged by the opposite parties. In this case complainant has made deposit with a firm expecting financial returns on the same and hence he is entitled to get the amount from the opposite parties. As per section 35 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. “Where under a contract between the partners the firm is not dissolved by the death of a partner, the estate of a deceased partner is not liable for any act of the firm done after his death.” In the instant case, the claim of the complainant is that the deceased Dileepkumar and first opposite party was the partners, of the and the complainant deposited the amount at the instance , the deceased Dileepkumar. As per section 35 of the Indian Partnership Act the asset of a deceased partner is not liable for act of the firm done after his death only. In this case Ext.A1 show that the complainant has got interest till March 2016. Hence opposite parties are directed to return the amount of Rs.3,00,000/-with 9% interest from March 2016 till realization. We further clarify that the liability of the 2nd opposite party is limited only to the extent of value of the properties inherited by them from deceased partner named Dileepkumar. The complainant is at liberty to proceed against such properties of the opposite parties for realization of the amount subject to the above limitation.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to return the amount of Rs3,00,000/-(Rupees Three lakh only) with 9% interest from March 2016 till realization. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order. In default complainant is allowed to realize above mentioned amount charge over the properties of the opposite parties. Since the preliminary relief is allowed no order as to cost and compensation. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 30th day of December 2017.
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) Sd/- Smt. Jasmine. D. (Member
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Fixed Deposit receipt No.2550
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
//True copy//
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/SF
Typed by: Br/-
Compared by:-
