Your World of Legal Intelligence
 India | 1-800-335-6202

Case nº Revision Petition No. 659 Of 2017, (Against the Order dated 05/08/2016 in Appeal No. 623/2013 of the State Commission Kerala) of NCDRC Cases, May 25, 2017 (case Ms. Cheruvallil Investments and Ors. Vs District Collector, & Anr.)

Document Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JudgeFor Appellant: Mr. Jose Abraham, Advocate
PresidentMr. Dr. B.C. Gupta,Presiding Member and Mr. Dr. S.M. Kantikar,Member
DefenseConsumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 21(b)
Resolution DateMay 25, 2017
Issuing OrganizationNCDRC Cases

Order:

Dr. B.C. Gupta, Presiding Member

  1. These two revision petitions have been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the impugned order dated 05.08.2016, passed by the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram (hereinafter referred to as "the State Commission") in Appeals No. 623/2013 and 624/2013, filed by the present petitioners, vide which, while dismissing the two appeals, the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pathanamthitta in consumer complaints no. 172/2012 and 173/2012 filed by the present respondent no. 2, allowing the said complaints, was upheld.

  2. The consumer complaint, C.C. No. 172/2012 has been filed by Preetha Elsa Sam represented by the power of attorney holder Matthew Abraham against the petitioners/opposite parties (OPs), saying that she had deposited a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs on 23.01.2008 for a period of 48 months with the OP firm, for which an interest @ 15% per annum was to be given to the complainant. A Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) No. 794 was also issued, covering the period from 23.01.2008 to 23.01.2012. After the date of maturity i.e. 23.01.2012 was reached, the OPs failed to repay the fixed deposit alongwith interest to the complainants. A legal notice was issued to the petitioners/OPs for repayment of the amount, but to no effect. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking payment of the matured fixed deposit amount of Rs. 8 lakhs alongwith a further 15% interest from the date of maturity i.e. 23.01.2012 till realisation and also to provide compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for mental agony and Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.

  3. In the second complaint, C.C. No. 173/2012, filed by the complaints Preetha Elsa Sam and Preethy Merry Sam through their attorney holder Matthew Abraham, it was stated that another sum of Rs. 5 lakhs was deposited by the complainant with the said firm on the same terms and conditions, but they failed to repay the maturity amount. In the said consumer complaint as well, same relief has been prayed for.

  4. The District Forum decided the two complaints vide their order dated 25.02.2013 and after considering the averments of the parties, directed the OPs to return the fixed deposit amounts in both the cases and its agreed rate of interest from the date of deposit alongwith compensation of Rs. 5,000/- each for mental agony and...

To continue reading

Request your trial