IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANAMTHITTA,
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2013.
Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member)
C.C. No. 166/2012 (Filed on 18.10.2012)
Between:
Varghese Mannumkal,
Mannumkal House,
Maroor, Mallassery P.O.,
Pramadom Village,
Kozhencherry Taluk,
Pathanamthitta Dist. … Complainant.
(By Adv. Muhammed Ansari)
And:
1. C.J. Harikumar,
Foreman & Managing Director,
Sree Gayathri Chits & Financiers,
Veluthedathu Building,
Kozhencherry P.O.,
Pathanamthitta District.
Residing at Chittayil House,
Vazhakkunnam Post,
Cherukolpuzha Village,
Kozhencherry Taluk,
Pathanamthitta District. … Opposite parties.
(By Adv. George. K. Mathew)
ORDER
Sri. Jacob Stephen (President):
The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for getting a relief from the Forum.
2. The gist of the complaint is as follows: The complainant was a chital in a 10 month chitty having sala of ` 50,000 conducted by the opposite party and he paid the first installment of ` 5,000 on 14.09.2011. Thereafter the complainant paid the entire 10 installments and the last such payment was on 10.07.2012. Thereafter, the complainant approached the opposite party for the chitty amount and the complainant surrendered the pass book of the chitty for verification as directed by the opposite party. But the opposite party failed to pay the chitty amount so far in spite of the complainant’s demand for the same which is a clear deficiency in service. So the complainant issued a demand notice on 10.09.2012 to the opposite party for the payment of the amount which was also not yielded by the opposite party. Because of the above said acts of the opposite party, the complainant had sustained financial loss and mental agony which is a clear deficiency in service and hence the opposite party is liable to the complainant for the same. Hence this complaint for the realization of the chitty amount of ` 50,000 with 12% interest from the date of maturity of the chitty along with compensation of ` 25,000 and cost of ` 15,000.
3. Opposite party entered appearance and filed his version with the following main contentions: According to the opposite party, the dispute herein is not a consumer dispute as defined in the Consumer Protection Act and hence prays for the dismissal of the complaint as this Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. Apart from the above contention, opposite party denied the allegations of the complainant as the complainant is not a chital and he had not paid any amount to the opposite party either as chitty amount or otherwise. There is no chitty existing in the name of the complainant. The complainant was the manager of the opposite party chitty fund at Pathanamthitta Branch at the time he has mentioned that he had joined the chitty and he was the sole custodian of all the records of the branch. The allegation regarding the surrender of the chitty pass book is also false. With the above contentions, opposite party prays for the dismissal of the complaint as they have not committed any deficiency of service to the complaint as the complainant was not a subscriber to any of the chitties as claimed by him.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the only point to be considered is whether this complaint can be allowed or not?
5. The evidence of this complaint consists of the oral testimonies of PW1 and DW1 and Exts. A1 to A4. After closure of evidence, both sides were heard.
6. The Point: The complainant’s allegation is that he was a chital in a chitty conducted by the opposite party and he had paid the entire chitty amount of ` 50,000 by 10 installments to the opposite party. After the maturity of the said chitty, opposite party failed to pay the chitty mount after obtaining the chitty pass book for verification. Due to the above said act of the opposite party, the complainant had sustained financial loss and mental agony and therefore the opposite party is liable to the complainant. Hence the complainant prays for allowing the complaint.
7. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the complainant had filed a proof affidavit in lieu of his chief examination along with certain documents. On the basis of the proof affidavit, complainant was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Exts. A1 to A4. Ext. A1 series (A1 to A1(f) are the 7 chitty receipts issued by the opposite party in the name of the complainant from 15.12.2011 to 10.07.2012. Ext. A2 is the copy of the advocate notice dated 10.09.2012 issued to the opposite party. Exts. A3 and A4 are the postal receipt and acknowledgment card of Ext. A2.
8. On the other hand, the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant is not at all a subscriber to any of the chitties conducted by the opposite party and he had not paid any amount or he had not surrendered any document to the opposite party as claimed by the complainant. The complainant was also an employee of the opposite party and he was the custodian of the whole records of the opposite party. Since the complainant was not a chital or he has not paid any amount, opposite party is not liable to the complainant. With the above contentions, opposite party argued for the dismissal of the complaint.
9. In order to prove the case of the opposite party, opposite party adduced oral evidence as DW1.
10. On the basis of the contentions and arguments of the parties, we have perused the entire materials on record and found that the complainant is solely relying on Ext. A1 series for substantiating his case. In the light of the contention of the opposite party that the complainant was not a chital or he has not paid any amount to the opposite party and the complainant was an employee of the opposite party and Ext. A1 series receipts are not genuine, the complainant ought to have adduce more evidence for proving the genuineness of Ext. A1 series receipts either by examining witnesses or by calling the relevant records kept by the opposite parties in connection with the complainant’s chitty transaction. But the complainant has not taken any steps for adducing any evidence in favour of him in this regard. So we are not inclined to accept the Ext. A1 series receipts as the authenticity and genuineness are doubtful. In the absence of better evidence, we find that this complaint is not allowable.
10. In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No cost.
Declared in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of January, 2013.
(Sd/-)
Jacob Stephen,
(President)
Sri. N. Premkumar (Member) : (Sd/-)
Smt. K.P. Padmasree (Member) : (Sd/-)
Appendix:
Witness examined on the side of the complainant:
PW1 : Varghese Mannumkal.
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:
A1 to A1(f) : Chitty receipts (7 in number) issued by the opposite
party in the name of the complainant.
A2 : Copy of advocate notice dated 10.09.2012 issued to
the opposite party.
A3 & A4 : Postal receipt and acknowledgment card of Ext. A2.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party:
DW1 : Harikumar.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party: Nil.
(By Order)
(Sd/-)
Senior Superintendent
Copy to:- (1) Varghese Mannumkal, Mannumkal House,
Maroor, Mallassery P.O., Pramadom Village,
Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta Dist. (2) C.J. Harikumar, Foreman & Managing Director,
Sree Gayathri Chits & Financiers,
Veluthedathu Building, Kozhencherry P.O.,
Pathanamthitta District.
(3) The Stock File.
