By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President: The case of complainant is that the first complainant is the father of 2nd and 3rd complainants who are minors. The first complainant joined in a kuri conducted by respondents by No.519 having sala of Rs.3,84,000/-. He also joined in the kuries of 517 and 518 in the name of complainants-2 and 3 respectively. In the kuries of 517 and 518 he had remitted Rs.27.600/- in total. Due to financial difficulties he could not remit the amount further. The kuries were not auctioned by the complainant or those were not prized to the complainants. The chitties were terminated on 9.1.06. The complainant will be entitled to get Rs.28,800/- in kuri No.519 and Rs.13,800/- in kuri No.517 and Rs.13,800/- in kuri No.516. The complainant demanded the amount on several times but they did not pay the same so far. So a lawyer notice was sent. There is deficiency in service on the part of respondents. Hence the complaint. 2. The version filed by the respondents is that the complainant did not remit the amount as stated in the complaint. The complainants failed to pay the kuri amount as per the terms and conditions of the kuri. So huge loss was caused to respondents. The complainants remitted Rs.37,765/- in all the kuries. As per the terms and conditions of the kuri after deducting the foreman commission of Rs.7100/- each the complainants are entitled to get only Rs.16,165/-. The respondents are entitled to compensate the loss suffered by the respondents out of this amount but they are not taking that benefit. The respondents intimated the complainants to hand over the amount by submitting the passbook but the complainants did not turn up. So there is no deficiency in service from the respondents. The averments in the reply notice are true. Hence dismiss. 3. The points for consideration are: (1) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of respondents? (2) If so, reliefs and costs. 4. The evidence adduced consists of Exts. P1 to P7 and Ext. R1. Both submitted no oral evidence. 5. Points: The complaint is filed to get back the kuri amount remitted by the complainants. The first complainant is the father and other complainants are the minor children of first complainant. The complainants produced Exts. P1 to P3 passbooks to show the remittances made by them. It is admitted by the complainants that they had stopped the payment on the way due to financial difficulties. They only seek to get back the amount remitted with interest. In the counter the respondents stated that they are ready to return the amount after deducting the foreman commission of Rs.7200/- each from the Exts. P1 to P3 passbook amount. It is true that since the complainants stopped the kuri on the way the respondents are entitled to take foreman commission. At the time of hearing it was submitted by both that proportionate foreman commission can be reduced from the amount due to the complainants. 6. In the result, the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to return the Ext. P1 to P3 passbook amount after deducting Rs.7200/- each as the proportionate foreman commission within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to cost and compensation. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 28th day of October 2010.
| | [HONORABLE Rajani P.S.] Member[HONORABLE Padmini Sudheesh] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE Sasidharan M.S] Member | | 
