D.o.F: 10/12/08 D.o.O:21/10/09 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD CC.276/08 Dated this, the 21st day of October 2009. PRESENT SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SYAMALADEVI : MEMBER Fathima, minor rep. by her father B.K.Yousuf, Bakot House, R/at Aarangadi, Po.Kanhangad Hosdurg , Kasaragod.. : Complainant (A.Radhakrishnan,Adv,Hosdurg) 1 President,Pudukkai Vainingattu Sree Vairajathan Eashwaran Kshethra committee, Puthukai : Vainingattu, Po.Uppilikkai,Hosdurg (exparte) :Opposite parties 2. C.V.Krishnan, S/o Koman, Pudukkai Vainingattu Sree Vairajathan Eashwaran Kshethra committee, Puthukai : Vainingattu, Po.Uppilikkai,Hosdurg (E.Sukumaran, Hosdurg,Adv. for OP.NO.2 ) 3.V.Balachandran, S/o Krishnan, r/at Vainingattu in Puthukai village Po Uppilikkai, Hosdurg, Kasaragod. . (exparte) ORDER SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ: PRESIDENT: The case of the minor complainant represented by herfather B.K.Yousuf can be summarized as follows: He joined in 3 chits run by opposite parties. Three of such chits having total claim of Rs.1,05,000/- each with a monthly subscription of Rs.3000/- . The chits were started on 12/12/2005,19/2/2006 and 26/5/2006 respectively. The complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.1,17,000/- in three chits. But the opposite parties absconded closing the chitty offices and appropriating the chitty amounts of various chittalans. Hence the complainant claiming refund of the total chitty amounts of Rs.117,000/- , and Rs15,000/- towards costs, mental agony and sufferings 2. Notice to all opposite parties were issued. Notice to Opposite parties 1&3 were returned with endorsement 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. The counsel for 2nd opposite party represented and filed version denying all the contentions of the complainant as well as the liability cast upon him. According to him, 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 Rs. 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. 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 her claim reiterating what is stated in the complaint. The passbooks issued bearing the seal of opposite parties committee is produced and marked as Exts.A1toA3. 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. Exts.A1toA3 were produced by the complainant is apparently the chitty passbooks. 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 Exts.A1 to A3 are the chitty passbooks issued by opposite parties to the complainant as part of their chitty transactions. 7. The non- completion of chitty and the appropriation of chitty amounts are deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. It became 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 pay the chitty amount Rs.1,17,000/- with interest @9% per annum from the date of complaint till payment along with a cost of Rs.3,000/-. Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Exts.A1 toA3- chitty passbooks eva/
......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi
......................P.Ramadevi | | 
