Kerala

Idukki

CC/233/2017

Kuriakose K P - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Vellathooval Service Co-operative Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.Shiji Joseph

26 Jul 2019

ORDER

 

DATE OF FILING :31/10/17

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 26^th day of July 2019

Present :

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR PRESIDENT

SMT.ASAMOL P. MEMBER

CC NO. 233/17

Between

Complainant : Kuriakose K.P,

Karimpanackal House,

Muthirapuzha Kara, Kallarkootty P.O.,

Devikulam Taluk.

(By Adv: Shiji Joseph)

And

Opposite Party : 1 . The Vellathooval Service Co-Operative Bank,

Represented by its Secretary,

Vellathoval P.O., Vellathoval.

2 . The Joint Registrar Co-Operative Societies,

Painavu P.O., Painavu,

Idukki – 685 603.

 

O R D E R

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)

 

The case of the complainant is that,

 

Complainant joined a scheme launched by the first opposite party in the year 1997, named 'Mangalya Recurring Deposit Scheme'. As per this scheme, for a deposit of Rs.63/- per month for 20 years, on maturity the opposite parties agreed to repay Rs. 1 Lakh. The complainant jointed in this scheme in the name of his minor daughter Anu Kuriakose. The complainant paid 240 instalments. The scheme was completed on 1^st April 2017. The complainant paid all the instalments in advance by 17/05/2012, and the complainant's daughter is entitled to get Rs.1 Lakh as the maturity value of the scheme, from the first opposite party.

 

Complainant further stated that on 01/04/17, he along with his daughter approached the opposite parties bank and demanded the amount. At that time the first opposite party requested one month time to pay the amount.

(Cont....2)

 

-2-

Since the opposite parties was not turned up to pay the amount after the above mentioned period. Complainant was constrained to issue a legal notice against the opposite parties on 15/05/17 for getting back the money. The notice was served to the opposite parties on 17/05/17 and on 01/06/17, the first opposite party given a reply stating that as per the decision of the General Body of the first opposite party bank, the bank stopped the scheme. The complainant further stated that, the decision of the general body of the first opposite party bank is not binding to him, as the scheme was launched 20 years back and he had paid all the instalments, before taking such a decision by the bank General Body. Thereafter the complainant sought information under RTI Act regarding the scheme from the Assistant Registrar and he replied that the scheme who introduced without sanction of the authority. The non-payment of the deposit money as per the scheme is illegal and it is gross deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant joined this scheme for the benefit of his daughter and until this date the first opposite party had not given any valid reason for the non-payment of the agreed amount. Hence the complainant approached this Forum and filed this complaint for directing the opposite parties to pay the agreed amount along with cost and compensation.

 

Even though opposite parties appeared before this Forum neither reply version nor any evidence is adduced.

 

Complainant adduced documentary evidence. He produced 8 documents, such as copy of pass book of the scheme 'Mangalya' issued by the first opposite party, copy of letter dated 09/04/12, copy of letter, copy of reply of the first opposite party dated 01/06/17, copy of letter of Assistant Registrar, Devikulam dated 02/07/17, copy of letter dated 18/06/17, petition under the RTI Act, letter dated 01/06/17 issued by the first opposite party were marked as Ext.P1 to Ext.P8 respectively. From this document is obvious that the complainant remitted 240 monthly instalments @ Rs.63/- per month. Since the allegation against the opposite parties and the documents are not denied or challenged by the opposite parties. The Forum decided the matter in favour of the complainant by admitting the averment in the complaint are genuine and believable.

 

(Cont....3)

-3-

 

Under the above said circumstances, the complaint allowed. Since there is no specific allegation against the second opposite party, the second opposite party is deleted from the party array. Hence the Forum directs the first opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.1 Lakh as maturity value of the scheme, Mangalya and also direct to pay Rs.5000/- as litigation cost to the complainant

within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest from the date of default, till its realisation.

 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 26^th day of July, 2019.

 

Sd/-

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

SMT. ASAMOL P. (MEMBER)

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

Nil

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 - Pass book of the scheme 'Mangalya' issued by the first opposite party

Ext.P2 - Copy of letter dated 09/04/12

Ext.P3 - Copy of letter

Ext.P4 - Copy of reply of the first opposite party dated 01/06/17

Ext.P5 - Copy of letter of Assistant Registrar, Devikulam dated 02/07/17

Ext.P6 - Copy of letter dated 18/06/17

Ext.P7 - Petition under the RTI Act

Ext.P8 - Letter dated 01/06/17 issued by the first opposite party

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil.

Forwarded by Order,

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT