Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/08/262

Valsala - Complainant(s)

Versus

C.V.Krishnan, Balachandran - Opp.Party(s)

02 Jan 2009

ORDER


IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
OLD S.P. OFFICE, PULIKUNNU
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/262

Valsala
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

C.V.Krishnan, Balachandran
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K.T.Sidhiq 2. P.P.Shymaladevi 3. P.Ramadevi

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

D.o.F:24/11/08    

D.o.O: 21/4/09

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                CC. 262/08

                        Dated this, the 21st   day of April 2009.

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                            : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                                : MEMBER

SMT.P.P.SYAMALADEVI                                    : MEMBER

Valsala, W/o N.K.Krishnan,

Nhanikadavu, Po.Ozhinhavalappu,            : Complainant

Nileshwar, Kanhangad.

 (in person)

 

1.Puthukai vainigat Sree Vairajathan

   Easwaran Kshethra Committee

   Rept. By its President,

2. C.V.Krishnan, S/o Koman                                      : Opposite parties

3. Balachandran, Secretary, S/o Krishnan,

   both are R/at Vainighat, Pudukkai,

   Po.Uppilikkai, Hosdurg.

(E.Sukumaran,Adv. for OP.NO.2)

 

                                                                        ORDER

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT

         The case of the complainant in brief is that the opposite parties 1 to 3 appropriated her chitty instalments paid in the chitty conducted by opposite  parties.  According to him she joined in the chitty on 09/4/06.  The total chitty amount on maturity was Rs.1,05,000/-.  Complainant remitted 12 monthly instalments of Rs.3,000/- totaling Rs.36,000/- till 9/3/07.  Before completing the chitty Opposite parties  1 to 3 absconded  closing the chitty offices and appropriating crores of rupees paid by   hundreds of chittalans including the complainant.  Hence the complaint  praying for an order of refund of Rs.36,000/- and  a further sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the mental agony suffered by the complainant with costs.

2.     Notice to all opposite parties  were issued.  Notice to Opposite parties 1&3 returned as unserved for the reason ‘left’.  Hence publication of notice against opposite parties  1&3 was ordered and even after publication of notice opposite parties 1&3 remained absent.  Hence they were set exparte.    2nd  opposite  party appeared and filed version denying all the contentions of the complainant as well as the liability cast upon him.  According to opposite party No.2, opposite parties have not conducted any chitty business .  The passbook produced by the complainant is created for the case.  The opposite parties  Pudukai Vainingat Sree Vairajathan  Easwaran Kshethra Committee  is a registered society under the  Societies Registration Act and 2nd opposite party is the treasurer of the committee.  The said committee decided to construct a  Maha kshetram  of the deity  Shri Vairajathan  Easwaran  along with a  Kalyana  Mandapam, old age home and school building .  The cost estimated for the said construction was Rupees Ten crores/- .  It is decided by the opposite parties committee to raise the said amount by way of donations and collections from devotees and  public.  For the convenience of  the devotees and public the committee opened day deposit and SB account in various financial institutions.  Accordingly they made deposits.  In  the meanwhile the committee faced  some financial straits due to the payment of income tax.  Some donators demanded  return of donations given for constructions and adopted dubious methods to get back the said amount lying in various banks in the name of opposite parties committee.  The opposite parties committee being a donatory    is not liable to return the donations.  The relief sought is against opposite parties is opposed to the provisions of societies registration Act and the rules and regulations of the opposite parties committee.  As per the registered bye law opposite parties committee President alone is having power to represent  the committee.  The secretary has no right to represent the committee.  There is no privity of contract between the parties which could be  enforced in law as per the provisions of the prize  chits and money   circulation (Banning) Act 1978 on the  one hand and on the other hand it is opposed to public policy.  The 2nd opposite party being the  treasurer of the society is not  liable  to be sued for recovery of the amount  allegedly  due  by the  society.  The 2nd opposite party is an unnecessary party.  Hence the  complaint is a defective for misjoinder of parties and hence liable to be dismissed.

3.     Complainant filed affidavit in support of his claim reiterating what is stated in the complaint.  The passbook issued bearing the seal of opposite parties committee is produced and marked as Ext.A1.  Opposite party No.2 filed counter affidavit and no documents produced .  Both sides heard and the documents produced.

4.     As against the allegations made by the complainant the opposite party No.2 has not produced any documents to substantiate his contentions.

5.     Ext.A1 produced by the complainant is apparently a  chitty passbook.  If it is a concocted one for  the purpose  of filing the complaint and  extort money from the opposite parties as alleged by the 2nd opposite party, then of course opposite parties should have resorted appropriate legal proceedings against complainant for creating such false document.  But no such  proceedings are seen initiated by opposite parties.

6.    The registered bye law of the opposite parties society, the details of SB accounts opened in the Financial Institutions, the details of payment made as income tax etc are not produced to prove the veracity of the contention of the 2nd opposite party.  In the absence of such documents  it can safely conclude that Ext.A1 is a chitty passbook  issued by opposite parties to the complainant as part of their chitty transactions.

7.  The non  completion of chitty and the appropriation of chitty instalments are  deficiency in services on the part of opposite parties.  It become more grave when  the chitty run by the opposite parties do not have the required license from the authorities. This is nothing but  an unscrupulous  exploitation  of consumers.

            Therefore the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs.36,000/- with interest @9% from the  date of complaint till payment along with a cost of Rs.2500/-.  Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.

                                                                 

MEMBER                                    MEMBER                         PRESIDENT

 

Ext.A1-chitty passbook

eva/

 

 




......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi
......................P.Ramadevi