Complaint filed on: 24-06-2022

                                                      Disposed on: 31-10-2022

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU

DATED THIS THE 31^st DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

PRESENT

SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, B.Com., LLM., PRESIDENT

SRI.KUMARA.N, B.Sc. (Agri), LLB., MBA., MEMBER

SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., LLB.(Spl)., LADY MEMBER

Consumer Complaint No104/2022 

Umamani S.K. S/o Late Ashwath Rao,

A/a 50 years, R/at “Skanda Krupa”,

11^th Cross, Near Ladies Hostel,

Ashoka Nagar, Tumkur.

(By Sri.C.N.Hanumantharaju, Advocate)

V/s

1.       Basavaraju, The President,

          Sri.Vinayaka Souharda Pattina Sahakari Niyamitha

          Lakshmiram Building, Behind Dwaraka Hotel,

          M.G.Road, Tumkur.

2.       Soumya, The Secretary, Sri.Vinayaka Souharda

          Pattina Sahakari Niayamitha, Lakshmiram Building

          Behind Dwaraka Hotel, M.G.Road, Tumkur.

3.       B.N.Puttanarasareddy, Advocate, Ex-President,

          Present Director, Sri.Vinayaka Souharda

          Pattina Sahakari Niayamitha, Lakshmiram Building

          Behind Dwaraka Hotel, M.G.Road, Tumkur.

4.       Smt. T.RRadha W/o B.N.Puttanarasareddy, Director,

          Sri.Vinayaka Souharda

          Pattina Sahakari Niayamitha, Lakshmiram Building

          Behind Dwaraka Hotel, M.G.Road, Tumkur.

          R/at Siri Nilaya, Hanumanthapura,

          SSMIT Post, Bellavi Hobli, Tumkur Taluk.

5.       K.L.Ramamohan S/o Lakshmiram, Director,

          Sri.Vinayaka Souharda Pattina Sahakari Niayamitha,

Lakshmiram Building Behind Dwaraka Hotel,

M.G.Road, Tumkur.

( Served absent)

O R D E R:

SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, PRESIDENT

This complaint was filed by the complainant against the Opposite Parties under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 with a prayer to direct the OPs to pay Rs.44,800/- with accrued interest till payment of R.D. amount and to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and harassment.

2.       It is the case of complainant that, he had deposited the amount under RD with the OPs as follows:

Further, the complainant submitted that she has deposited the above said RD amount up-to 24.11.2020 and subsequently the complainant approached the OPs and requested them to return the RD amount with interest, for that the OP No.3 who was the president at that time, postponed the same on one or the other pretext and thereafter also the complainant requested several times to the pay the RD amount with interest through phone and by approaching personally.  But all went in vain.  Hence, the complainant without any alternative filed this complaint. 

3.       In spite of service of notice, the OPs remained absent. Thereafter  the complainant filed affidavit in lieu of evidence and marked the documents at Ex.C1 to C5.  

4.       On hearing the arguments of learned counsel for complainant and perusal of the documents, the points that would arise for determination are as under;

1. Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OPs?

2. Is complainant entitled to the relief sought for?

5.        Our findings aforesaid points are as under:

Point No.1: In the affirmative

Point No.2: As per the final order

:REASONS:

Point Nos.1 and 2:

6.       The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that, the OPs have failed to return the RD amount with interest. The complainant in the affidavit evidence reiterated the averments of complaint.

7.       To prove the case, the complainant has produced Ex.C1 to C5/Copy of Pass book bearing A/c Nos.270, 271, 233, 272 and 269.

8.       It is seen from the copy from the copies of the pass book that the complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.44,800/- in the R.D. Account with the OPs. 

9.       The counsel for complainant submits at the time of arguments that though the complainant requested the OPs several times to pay RD amount with interest, but the OPs did not pay the R.D. amount with interest.  Hence, the complainant without any alternative filed this complaint.

10.  It is seen that the OPs have remained absent in spite of receipt of notice from this Commission.  The OP has not produced any documents to disprove the allegation made by the complainant against them by appearing before this Commission even an opportunity was provided to them.  This goes to show that there is a deficiency of service on the part of OP. 

11. Due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of the OP, the complainant compelled to approach this Commission.  Hence, the complainant is entitled for compensation of Rs.10,000-00 towards mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.10,000-00 towards litigation of the cost. In the result, we proceed to pass the following;

:ORDER:

The complaint filed by complainant is allowed in part. 

The OPs are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.44,800/- with accrued interest as agreed to the complainant till its realization.

The OPs are further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation costs to the complainant

It is ordered that the above order shall be complied by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt/knowledge of the order.

Supply free copy of this order to both parties

(