IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLLAM

DATED THIS THE   30^th   DAY OF APRIL 2022

Present: -    Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LLM. President

Smt.S.Sandhya   Rani. Bsc, LLB ,Member

Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

    CC.No.221/2020

1. Sunit Ninan George,

S/o Georgee Ninan, aged 31 yrs,

Palavilakandathil,Bhavana Nagr-273,

Town Limit, Kollam 691 008.

(By Adv.M.I.Alexander Panicker)

2. Leela Mathews,

W/o Georgee Ninan,

Palavilakandathil,Bhavana Nagr-273,

Town Limit, Kollam 691 008.

(By Adv.M.I.Alexander Panicker)

3. Georgee Ninan,

S/o Ninan,

Palavilakandathil,Bhavana Nagr-273,

Town Limit, Kollam 691 008.

(By Adv.M.I.Alexander Panicker)                             :           Complainants

V/s                                                                                                     

1. Thomas Daniel,

The Managing Partner,

Popular Finance/Popular Traders/Popular Dealers

Indikattil House, Vakayar,

Konni, Pathanamthitta 689 698.

2. Prabha Thomas,

W/o Thomas Daniel, Partner,

Popular Finance/Popular Traders/Popular Dealers,        

Indikattil House, Vakayar,

Konni, Pathanamthitta 689 698.                                :          Opposite parties

3. Rinu Marium Thomas,

D/o Thomas Daniel, Partner,

Popular Finance/Popular Traders/Popular Dealers,

Indikattil House, Vakayar,

Konni, Pathanamthitta 689 698.

4. Reba Mary Thomas,

D/o Thomas Daniel,Partner,

Popular Finance/Popular Traders /Popular Dealers,

Indikattil House, Vakayar,

Konni, Pathanamthitta 689 698.

ORDER

Smt.Sandhya Rani, B.Sc, LLB, Member

          This is a case based on a complaint filed U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 1919.

          The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-

          The 1^st complainant is a Medical practitioner by profession and 2^nd and 3^rd complainants are his parents and both were retired employees.  1^st opposite party is the husband of 2^nd opposite party, 3^rd and 4^th opposite parties are their daughters.  All of them claim to be the partners of business firms in the name and style Popular Finance especially Popular Traders and Popular Dealers.  The profile published and advertised in various media and in the website claimed that POPULAR FINANCE is a successfully functioning Gold Loan firm established in 1965 by founder Chairman T.K.Daniel, having the registered office at Vakayar, Pathanamthitta District.  That POPULAR is at present a conglomeration of various business concerns like Pupular Traders, Popular Dealers etc. are collectively known as Popular Group.  The sudden spurt of development of the business firms of the opposite parties gained public attention and confidence in them and they have opened their branches throughout Kerala and outside Kerala.  Thus they have opened a branch office at the shopping complex of the St.Thomas

Cathedral, Kollam and cunningly posted a reputed person of the said church as its Branch Manager under his influence on parishioners and also on taking advantage of the fact that the 2^nd opposite party belonged to that church, many members of the said church had trusted the opposite parties and had entrusted their savings in the said branch on the assurance that the repayment will be prompt when and where required.  The 2^nd and 3^rd complainants getting attracted by the wide publicity through different medias and on direct canvasing through agents and officials of the opposite parties they are made to believe that the opposite parties are reliable and trust worthy private financiers and they are authorized and competent to receive deposits and would return the deposited amount with interest as promised.  Thus the complainants 2^nd and 3^rd had deposited their saving in the name of their son and were not drawing interests so the amounts got accumulated and from their accounts the following 12 receipts were issued in the name of Popular Traders/Popular Dealers so as to acknowledge the liability of the opposite parties to the complainants.  The details of the acknowledgment of the liability in the form of receipts are shown below.

Branches of the opposite parties remained closed during Covid 19 Pandemic lock down period.  After lifting of lockdown restrictions also the functioning of the branches were restricted and to those who want to withdraw their deposits were not paid immediately and started deferring payments on lame excuses.  The complainants had also approached the concerned branch office of the opposite parties to get back their due amount but not paid.  Slowly the complainants realized that the financial institutions run by the opposite parties are being closed and customers started lodging complaints to the police and police registering cases against the opposite parties and the opposite parties absconded with an intention to flee away to foreign countries.  The police had arrested all the opposite parties and investigation is going on to search and find the huge amounts they received and diverted. 

Now the complainants are convinced that the opposite parties were engaged in unfair trade practices and were fraudulently conducted financial business without proper license or permission from RBI.  The opposite parties were deliberate to mislead the public with false claims and they were deliberate to cheat customers who trusted them.  They were deliberate to receive deposits on false promises  and forging documents in the name of paper firms.  They have forged and fabricated documents and misappropriated the amount entrusted to them so as to cause unlawful loss to the complainants and unlawful gain to the opposite parties.  There is deficiency in service on the opposite parties as private financiers as they failed to return the amount received with agreed rate of interest.  Total amount due as per the above 12 receipts from the date of deposits is 10,96,626/-(Rupees Ten lakhs ninety six thousand six hundred and twenty six only).  The complainants are also entitled to get the promised rate of interest on the whole amount @ 12% from its w.e.f.date. The complainants never cared to draw interest on each month.  Totally Rs.1,31,595/- is due from the opposite parties by way of interest.  Thus totally an amount of Rs.12,28,221/- is due to the complainants from the opposite parties and their assets.  The said amount may be considered as the loss incurred to the complainants.   The complainant even before expiry of the respective periods shown in the receipts wished to get back the promised amount, but was deferred on lame excuses.   The complainant had contacted the opposite parties in person and requested to refund the entire deposit amount by closing all accounts even prematurely, but the opposite parties were not ready to return the amount so that the loss and injury caused to the complainants can never be equated. Hence the complaint.

Notice issued from the Commission returned unserved.  Hence notice was published in  Indian Express Daily and produced a copy of paper publication on 05.01.2021 and on that day the opposite parties No.1 to 4 were called absent and set exparte.

2^nd complainant filed proof affidavit by reiterating the averments in the complaint and got marked Exts.P1 to P12 documents and advanced arguments.

All the documents Exts.P1 to P12 are receipts which indicating the deposits of various accounts at the Popular Traders, out of which Ext.P1 receipt indicating that 1^st and 3^rd complainants have deposited Rs.61,600/- w.e.f. 23.11.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P2 receipt indicating that 1^st and 2^nd complainants have deposited Rs.1,12,000/- w.e.f. 01.11.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P3 receipt indicating that 1^st and 2^nd complainants have deposited Rs.1,22,080/- w.e.f.09.11.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P4 receipt indicating that 1^st and 2^nd complainants have deposited Rs.1,20,960/- w.e.f. 17.09.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P5 receipt indicating that 1^st and 2^nd complainants have deposited Rs.1,20,960/- w.e.f. 21.09.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P6 receipt indicating that 1^st and 2^nd complainants have deposited Rs.57,258/- w.e.f. 28.11.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P7 receipt indicating that 1^st complainant Sumit Ninan George and Amit Mathew George have deposited Rs.1,20,960/- w.e.f. 26.09.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P8 receipt indicating that 1^st and 3^rd complainants have deposited Rs.43,512/- w.e.f. 17.12.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P9 receipt indicating that 1^st and 3^rd complainants have deposited Rs.37,296/- w.e.f. 17.12.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered in 12%.  Ext.P10 receipt indicating that the 1^st complainant has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- w.e.f.20.12.2016 for a period of 72 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P11 receipt indicating that 1^st complainant has

deposited Rs.1,00,000/- w.e.f. 20.12.2016 for a period of 72 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  Ext.P12 receipt indicating that 1^st and 3^rd complainants have jointly deposited Rs.1,00,000/- w.e.f.05.12.2019 for a period of 12 months and the profit share offered is 12%.  The above receipts have been seen issued on different amounts.

The unchallenged averments in the affidavit coupled with Ext.P1 to P12 documents would establish prima facie that the complainants 1 to 3 have jointly deposited Rs.10,96,626/-.

The complainants have sworn in the complaint as well as proof affidavit that they had not drawn interest/ share of profit so the amount got accumulated.  However the branches of the opposite parties remained closed during Covid 19 Pandemic lock down period. Though the lockdown was lifted they imposed restrictions for the functioning of the branches and those who want to withdraw their deposits were not paid immediately and started deferring payment on lame excuses.  The complainant had approached branch office concerned to get back the amount due but not paid.  Later the complainants realized that the financial institutions run by the opposite parties are being closed and customers started lodging complaints before police and accordingly cases were registered against the opposite parties and hence the opposite parties absconded with an intention to flee away to foreign countries.  But the Police has arrested the opposite parties and investigation is going on to search and find the huge amounts they received from various customers and diverted.   On evaluating the entire materials available on record we are of the view that the above act of the opposite parties would constitute deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. 

The (b) relief sought for in the complaint is to award reasonable compensation.  But there is no sufficient pleadings to award compensation apart from awarding the alleged loss.  There is no pleadings either in the complaint or in the proof affidavit to the effect that due to the misfeasance, malfeasance and      nonfeasance of the opposite parties the complainant has sustained any mental agony apart from the monitory loss.   In the circumstances we hold that the complainants are not entitled to get compensation as claimed in (b) relief.

 The complainants are entitled to get Rs.10,96,626/- as amount deposited.  They are also entitled to get the promised rate of profit for the each investment right from the date of investment till the date of maturity and thereafter entitled to get interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of maturity till the date of realization.  

          In the result complaint stands allowed in part in the following terms.

1. Opposite parties are directed to return the amount covered by Exts.P1 to P12 receipts with agreed share of profit from the respective date of deposit/investment till the date of maturity and thereafter interest at the rate of 9% p.a. till the date of payment/realization.
2. Opposite parties 1 to 4 are further directed to pay costs Rs.5,000/- to the complainants.
3. The prayer to grant compensation stands dismissed.
4. Opposite parties 1 to 4 are directed to comply with direction No. 1 & 2 within 45 days from today failing which the complainants are at liberty to realize the same from 1 to 4 jointly and severally and from the assets of the Popular Finance/Popular Traders.

  Dictated to the Confidential Assistant  Smt. Minimol S. transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the  Open Commission this the 30^th  day of  April 2022.        

S.SANDHYA RANI:Sd/-

   E.M .MUHAMMED IBRAHIM:Sd/-

                                                    STANLY HAROLD:Sd/-

Forwarded/by Order

                                                                                       Senior superintendent

INDEX

Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:-Nil

Documents marked for the  complainant

Ext.P1             : Original receipt No. 0574477 of Popular Traders for Rs.61,600/-

Ext.P2             : Original receipt No. 0574478 of Popular Traders for Rs.1,12,000/-

Ext.P3             : Original receipt No. 0574479 of Popular Traders for Rs.1,22,080/-

Ext.P4             : Original receipt No. 0574480 of Popular Traders for Rs.1,20,960/- 

Ext.P5             : Original receipt No. 0574481 of Popular Traders for Rs.1,20,960/-

Ext.P6             : Original receipt No.0574482 of Popular Traders for Rs.57,258/-

Ext.P7             : Original receipt No.0574483 of Popular Traders for Rs.1,20,960/-

Ext.P8             : Original receipt No.0574546 of Popular Traders for Rs.43,512/-

Ext.P9             : Original receipt No.0574548 of Popular Traders for Rs.37,296/-

Ext.P10          : Original receipt No.0435035 of Popular Traders for Rs.1,00,000/-

Ext.11             : Original receipt No.0435036 of Popular Traders for Rs.1,00,000/-

Ext.12             : Original receipt No.0159088 of Popular Dealers for Rs.1,00,000/-

Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-Nil

Documents marked for opposite party:-Nil