A consumer complaint involving complex factual disputes, such as allegations of forgery, fraud, and criminal conspiracy, which necessitate elaborate trial and documentary evidence, is not maintainable before the Consumer Commission as its proceedings are summary in nature.

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

C.C.No.107/2016

ORDER DATED : 27.03.2026

PRESENT:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT

SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER

COMPLAINANT:

K.P. Somakumar, S/o Parameswaran, Koramparambil House,

Kodungallur, Thrissur

(by Adv. T.K. Sajeev)

Vs.

OPPOSITE PARTIES:

(by Adv. G.S. Kalkura)

1. Maben Nidhi Limited, represented by its Managing Director (formerly

Manappuram Benefit Fund Limited), Manappuram Finance Limited,

Head Office, Valappad, Thrissur – 680567

2. Nandakumar, Managing Director, M/s. Manappuram Finance Ltd., Head

Office, Valappad. Thrissur – 680567

3. Jyothi, Managing Director, Maben Nidhi Limited, (formerly

Manappuram Benefit Fund Limited), Manappuram Finance Limited,

Head Office, Valappad, Thrissur – 680567

4. Branch Manager, Maben Nidhi Limited (formerly Manappuram Benefit

Fund Limited), Manappuram Finance Limited, Head Office, Valappad,

Thrissur – 680567

5. Haseena, W/o Arif, Thanathparambil House, Kaipamangalam P.O.,

Thrissur – 680681

ORDER

SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER

This is a complaint filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2. The complainant is a depositor of Maben Nidhi Ltd., a company registered

under the Companies Act, 1956.

3. The first opposite party is Maben Nidhi Limited, a company registered

under the Companies Act and notified as Nidhi company. The second opposite party is

the Managing Director of M/s Manapuram group of companies. The third opposite

party is the Managing Director of the first opposite party. The fourth opposite party is

the Branch Manager of the first opposite party. The fifth opposite party is an employee

of the first opposite party.

4. The averments in the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.20 lakhs with the first opposite party

as fixed deposits for Rs.10 lakhs each vide fixed deposit receipt numbers

0200030202992788 and 0200030202992787 dated 05.05.2015. The fixed deposits

were for a period of one year, maturing on 05.05.2016. The complainant approached

the Kodungallur branch of the first opposite party on 02.07.2015 to get the name of the

depositor in the fixed deposit receipts changed to his daughters, Anju and Anjali. The

fifth opposite party accepted the receipts and gave a written acknowledgement with

signature on the photocopy of the fixed deposit receipts given by the complainant.

5. The fifth opposite party had promised to return the receipts after changing

the names upon obtaining sanction from the head office, which will take a week's time.

The complainant and his wife went to the USA on 13.07.2015 and returned on

11.11.2015. On seeing the reports regarding the misappropriation at the Manappuram

group of companies, especially Kodungallur branch, the complainant went to the

Kodungallur branch of the first opposite party and enquired about their fixed term

deposits. He came to understand that loans up to 90% were given from their fixed

deposits. As per the proceedings of the loan taken from the fixed deposits, it was

revealed that the proceedings regarding the loans are dated 11.07.2015 and

20.10.2015. It is shown that from the fixed deposit of Rupees Ten Lakhs, Rupees

Nine Lakhs was sanctioned in each deposit. The dates of these proceedings are

16.07.2015 and 20.10.2015. It is stated that the complainant had applied for the said

loan. However, he has not made any such request for loan and he was in USA during

that relevant period. The signature seen in the receipts are fabricated signatures.

6. The complainant filed a complaint before the Circle I