State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
1.The Joint Registrar, Co.Operative ... vs Periasamy, S/O.Palaniyappa Gounder, ... on 4 October, 2013
BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI Present: Thiru J. Jayaram, M.A., M.L. PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER
Thiru S. Sambandam, B.Sc., MEMBER F.A. No. 1034 / 2011 (Against Order in C.C.69/2008 on the file of the DCDRF, Namakkal) Dated this the 04th day of OCTOBER, 2013
1. The Joint Registrar, ] Co-operative Societies, ] Collectorate Campus, ] Namakkal District ] ]
2. The Deputy Registrar of ] Co-operative Societies, ] Tiruchengode Range, ] Velur Road, ] Tiruchengode, ] Namakkal ] Appellants / Opposite Parties ]
3. The Special Officer, ] Anangoor Primary Agricultural ] Cooperative Bank, Anangoor, ] K. Iyampalayam Post, ] Jedarpalayam Via, ] Paramathi Velur Taluk, ] Namakkal District ] Vs Periyasamy, ] S/o Palaniyappa Gounder, ] Chinnamaruthur Road, ] K. Iyampalayam Post, ] Jedarpalayam Via, ] Respondent / Complainant Paramathi Velur Taluk, ] Namakkal District ] This appeal coming before us for final hearing on 01.10.2013 and on hearing the arguments of both sides and upon perusing the material records, this Commission made the following Order:
Counsel for Appellants/Opposite Parties: Mr. N. Thiagarajan Counsel for Respondent/Complainant: Mr. N. Manoharan J. JAYARAM, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is filed by the opposite parties against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Namakkal in C.C.69/2008, dated 22-02-2011, allowing the complaint.
2. The case of the complainant is that he deposited a sum of Rs.1,15,000/- with the 3rd opposite party, on 14-05-2005 and the maturity date is 14-05-2006 and after the maturity, the 3rd opposite party did not pay the amount, and this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence the complaint praying for direction to the opposite parties to pay the balance amount deposited deducting therefrom the loan amount of Rs.40,000/-, and interest at the rate of 24% and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony, and a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards monetary loss and hardship, and to pay costs of Rs.4,000/-.
3. According to the opposite parties, there is no dispute regarding the amount deposited by the complainant and the loan availed by the complainant, but the former Secretary of the opposite party bank and some staff of the bank indulged in malpractices and misappropriation of funds and so they could not return the amount and there is no deficiency in service on their part.
4. The District Forum allowed the complaint with costs holding that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Aggrieved by this impugned order, the opposite parties have preferred this appeal.
5. It is pertinent to note that the appellants / opposite parties have admitted the averments in the complaint regarding the deposit, loan, etc. and according to them, the respondent / complainant deposited a sum of Rs.1,15,000/- on 14-05-2005 and subsequently he availed a loan of Rs.40,000/- from the 3rd opposite party on 5-09-2005 and admittedly as on the date of maturity viz. 14-05-2006, the amount payable to the complainant by the 3rd opposite party is Rs.98,173/- and the amount could not be returned. Therefore, we hold that deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is properly established.
6. The opposite parties counsel argued urging that the opposite parties 1&2 are not liable for deficiency in service and that interest awarded by the District Forum is excessive and that the compensation for mental agony may not be awarded. It is relevant to note that the opposite parties 1&2 are the controlling and supervising authorities of the 3rd opposite party, and therefore we hold that the opposite parties 1 to 3 are liable jointly and severally.
7. The District Forum allowed the complaint holding that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and has passed an order directing the opposite parties to return a sum of Rs.98,173/- with interest at the rate of 12 % p.a. from the date of maturity i.e. 14-5-2006 till the date of payment and to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. till the date of the order and to pay costs of Rs.1,500/-.
8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that interest on Rs.98,173/- at the rate of 12% p.a. is on the higher side and we are inclined to reduce the rate of interest to 9% p.a. We further feel that award of compensation of Rs.4,000/- for mental agony is unwarranted; and that the litigation costs is also on the higher side and we are inclined to reduce it to Rs.1,000/- and the order of the District Forum has to be modified accordingly.
9. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part modifying the order of the District Forum by setting aside the order and directing the appellants / opposite parties 1 to 3 to pay jointly and severally a sum of Rs.98,173/- (Rupees Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Three only) with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of maturity i.e. 14-5-2006 till realization and to pay costs of Rs.1,000/-. No order as to costs in the appeal.
S. SAMBANDAM J. JAYARAM MEMBER PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER