Indus Valley Estates And Farms Ltd vs JASJIT KAUR SAWHNEY

THE Complaint No. 603 of 1998 instituted by Jasjit Kaur and Complaint No. 604/1998 instituted by her husband Kuldip Singh on 5.6.1998 have been decided on 24.8.1999 by District Forum-I and refund of deposit together with future interest at the rate of 12% per annum and costs Rs. 1,000/- has been ordered. Aggrieved against it, Appeal No. 184 of 1999 and 185 of 1999 have been attempted by M/s. Indus Valley Estates and Farms Limited and shall be decided by this order.

BRIEFLY the facts are that Jasjit Kaur deposited a sum of Rs. 30,000/- on 4.9.1997 for a period of one year with the appellant Indus Valley Estates and Farms Limited, having its registered office at Shop-cum-office Nos. 371-72 Sector 35/B, Chandigarh. A similar sum of Rs. 30,000/- was deposited by her husband Kuldip Singh. The interest at the rate of 24% per annum was agreed to be paid and only for a few months the cheques issued in this regard in advance were honoured but not thereafter. The claim put forward by Jasjit Kaur in the complaint was mainly Rs. 30,000/- and the outstanding interest Rs. 3,000/- together with damages and costs at the time the complaint was instituted on 5th June, 1998. The Director of Indus Valley, the present appellant, admitted the deposit in his letter dated 1.5.1998 [Annexure 5-g] and told the depositors that they were working on permutations and combinations to tie over the present crisis and they may be given a period of three months to meet the demand. However, the keenness of the depositors increased and the honest admission made regarding deposit in a written reply filed through Mr. Sanjiv Walia, Advocate also bearing the signature of Managing Director of the appellant, resulted in concession awarded by the District Forum that the promised rate of interest was reduced from 24% to 12% in the impugned order for the subsequent period. Shri Harmanjot Singh Gosal, Director, appearing on behalf of the appellant has made an offer that the outstanding amount shall be paid by means of quarterly instalments within the next 2-3 years and a schedule has been placed on record containing proposed instalments for depositors aged above 65 years and those aged above 80 years. However, the respondents, appearing in person, have specifically declined to accept the balance in the form of instalments notwithstanding that one small instalment towards the interest was handed over to the respondent(s) through cheque on the last date of hearing here. The aforesaid acceptance was, of course, a kind of part payment but it was not an admission for discharge of outstanding sum, by means of instalments by the appellant. Since the factum of deposit has been established and the rate of interest has already been brought down at 12% per annum and the costs awarded Rs. 1,000/- by the District Forum are also reasonable. No interference is called for and the Appeal Nos. 184 and 185 of 1999 are hereby dismissed. Appeals dismissed.