IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR

Present: Sri.K.Gopalan:   President

Smt.K.P.Preethakumari:  Member

Smt.M.D.Jessy:              Member

Dated this, the  16^th  day of March   2010

CC/122/2009

K.P.Ramadas,

Managing Director,

M/s.Kerala Express,

Cargo Lines (P) Ltd.

Fort Road, Kannur 1.                                       Complainant

1       .Kerala Chit Fund (Regd)

IIInd Floor, Pan African Plaza,

Pulimoodu, Thiruvananthapuram 1.

2.      Branch Manger,

Kerala Chit Fund (Regd)

A.B.Tower, Karandakad,                                 Opposite parties

Kasaragod

3.      Branch Manger,

Kerala Chit Fund,

Branch-II, D30, 321, Fort Light Complex,

Fort Road, Kannur 1.

O R D E R

Smt.K.P.Preethakumari, Member

            This is a complaint filed under section 12 of consumer protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.47, 950/- along with Rs.10, 000/- as compensation and cost.

            The case of the complainant is that he was the subscriber of two chit ties conducted by opposite parties for an amount of Rs.50, 000/- each. The date of commencement of chitties was 30.6.07 and 15.6.07having group No.KCF/2/GGI and KCF/2/CCII respectively.  The subscription was collected by3rd opposite party from the complainant. Rs.32980/- was paid in first chitty and Rs.34, 400/- paid to 2^nd chitty and the opposite party had settled the both chit ties account for an amount of Rs.47950/- as on 2.1.09 and promised to pay the amount within 15 days and 2^nd opposite party was authorized by 1^st opposite party to make payment without delay and the complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party for getting payment with the receipt and original pass book. But they refused to make payment by saying that he was not authorized byt1st opposite party. The opposite parties are willfully delaying the payment without any reason and all the efforts of the complainant to settle the account is in vein. Even after five months the opposite parties failed to make payment which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. Due to this the complainant was put to hardship and loss and financial difficulty and all the misfortune caused to the complainant due to the deficiency in service rendered by the opposite parties and are solely responsible for the loss and hardship. Hence this complaint.

            In pursuance to the notice issued by the Forum, 1st opposite party appeared and filed their version. Opposite parties 2 and 3 are absent and set exparte. Later on 1^st opposite party’s counsel reported no instruction and hence 1^st opposite party also called absent and set exparte.

            The 1^st opposite party’s contentions are as follows: The opposite party has no branch office now at Kannur and hence this Forum has no jurisdiction to try the case. The complainant is not a consumer since M/s.Kerala Express Cargo Lines (P) Ltd is the subscriber of chitty referred in the complaint and they subscribed the chitties as a part of the commercial transaction. So that the company cannot maintain a complaint before the Forum. The opposite party admitted that they had a branch in Kannur and the branch at Kannur was managed by one Sreejith and he left the office on one fine morning misappropriating huge amount and without handing over the properties of opposite party since the registers and other properties were not handed over to the opposite parties, the 1^st opposite party is not in a position to check the veracity of the complaint. A criminal case against the above Sreejith Das is pending before JFCM  Kannur as CC.232/08. According to opposite party as per available records one Ramdas has received the chitty amount and he also owes some amount to the opposite party. If the said amount was received by the person who represented the complaint he cannot approach the Forum again and hence the 1^st opposite party suspect that the complaint was filed in collusion with the above said Sreejith and hence the said Sreejith is a necessary party. The 1^st opposite party further denies the allegations that an amount of Rs.32, 980/- was paid in first chitty and Rs.34, 400/- was paid to 2^nd chitty and that the opposite party settled both chitties for an amount of Rs.47950/- on 2.1.09 and promised to pay the amount within 15 days etc. According to 1^st opposite party he never authorized to settle the chitties and if it is settled by any person in Kannur it may be an affair with the complainant and the said person and hence 1^st opposite party has no responsibility. If the account in respect of the chitties of the complainant remains unsettled it is due to the reason of misappropriation of accounts and non-availability of records. The opposite party further submits that they believe that the above Sreejith Das will came and handed over the properties during the trial of criminal case and assures that soon after getting back the records the accounts of the complainant will be settled without any further delay and hence there is no deficiency of service on the part of 1^st opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

            Upon the above pleadings the following issues have raised for consideration.

1. Whether the complainant is a consumer and Forum has jurisdiction to try the case?

2. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of opposite parties?

3. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief?

4. Relief and cost.

            The evidence in this case consist of the chief affidavit filed by the complainant in lieu of chief examination and Ets.A1, A2 (a) and A2 (b)

Issue No.1

            The opposite party contended that since the opposite party has no branch office at Kannur the Forum has no jurisdiction to try the case. But they admitted that the opposite party had an office at Kannur and all the transaction was taken place at Kannur. So it is clear that cause of action for the complaint was taken place at Kannur which is within the jurisdiction of the Forum and hence we hold that the Forum has ample jurisdiction to try the case. Yet another contention of the 1^st opposite party is that since the complainant has subscribed to the chitties as a part of their commercial transaction, the complainant is not a consumer. But the opposite party has not adduced any evidence to prove that contention. The opposite party admits that the complainant is a subscriber of the chit. More over the opposite party has not turned up before the Forum. So in the absence of contra evidence, we hold that the complaint is a consumer under the Act and hence the Forum have ample jurisdiction to try the case and hence the issue No.1 is found in favour of the complainant.

IssueNos. 2 to 4

            The Exts.A1, A2 (a) and A2 (b) proves the case of the complainant that he is a subscriber of two chitties having group  name KFC/2/CCII commenced on 15.6.07 and KCF/2/GG/I commenced  on 30.6.06. The Ext.A1 proves that the complainant has remitted Rs.47950/- in Kannur branch. But even though the 1^st opposite party appeared and filed version stating so many contentions, he has not turned up before the Forum to prove his contention. This it self shows the deficiency of the opposite partiers. The complainant proves his case and hence we are of the opinion that the opposite parties are liable to pay the settled amount of Rs.47950/- along with 9% interest from the date of settlement i.e. on 2.1.09. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs.2000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as cost of the proceedings and order passed accordingly.

            In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.47950/-(Rupees Forty Seven thousand Nine Hundred and fifty only) along with 9%interest from the date of settlement i.e. On 2.1.09 along with Rs.2000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) as compensation and Rs.500/-(Rupees Five hundred only) as cost  of this proceedings to the complainant within one  month from the date of receipt of this order. Otherwise the complainant is at liberty to execute the order against the opposite parties as per the provisions of consumer protection act.

                                    Sd/-                             Sd/-                         Sd/-

President                      Member                       Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the complainant

A1.Copy of the letter dt.2.1.-09 sent by OP

A2.Chitty pass books

Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil

Witness examined for either side: Nil

                                                            /forwarded by order/

                                                            Senior Superintendent

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur.