By Sri.M.S.Sasidharan, Member

          The complainant’s case is that he has subscribed one narukku in the 16^th  day monthly kuri conducted by the respondent vide ticket No.838.  The said kuri started on 16/1/1998 and ended on 16/12/2007.  The kuri company has  declared bonus prizes for its subscribers.  It was intimated that the subscriber No.765 has won a Hero Honda Motor bike in the bonus prize draw held on 16/10/2006.  Later it was realized that the prize has not been distributed since the subscriber No.765 has not remitted the kuri instalments.  The kuri  company has committed a grave unfair trade practice as they  exclude the subscribers who remitted the kuri instalment or make a second draw if the price winner was a defaulter.  The  complainant used to remit the kuri instalment regularly and was eligible for the bonus prize in the 106^th instalment.  The subscribers complained  when they realized that the prize was not distributed and it was assured that the bonus prize will be given on closing the kuri.  The kuri ended on 16/12/2007.  But the draw as assured was not conducted. Hence the complaint filed.

          2. The counter version is that the respondent admit that the complainant has joined in  the kuri conducted by the respondent.  They did not deny that the bonus prize on 16/10/06 was not distributed  since the winner defaulted the instalment.  It was not stated in the bylaw that the  subscribers who remit the instalments are eligible to include in the bonus prize draw.  The prize winner can remit the kuri instalment on or before 15^th of the month.  But the prize winner has not remitted the kuri  instalment  on 15^th or after the month.  And the bonus prize was not given.  The respondent had not given any assurance to conduct the draw again  If it is directed the respondents are ready to conduct the draw again and give the bonus prize.  Hence dismiss the complaint.

          3. Points for consideration are :

1) Is there any  unfair trade practice committed by the respondent ?

2) If so reliefs and costs ?

          4. Evidence  consists of Exhibit P1 only.  No evidence has been adduced by the respondent.

          5. Points: The complainant’s case is that he subscribed one narukku in the 16^th day monthly kuri conducted by the respondent.  He used to remit the instalments regularly.  The respondents have declared bonus prizes for the subscribers.  It was intimated that No.765 has won the Hero Honda bike in the bonus prize draw held on 16/10/06.  But later it was realized that the prize was not distributed to the winner as he defaulted the kuri instalments.  The respondents have not  included names of subscribers who remit the instalments regularly or did not conduct the draw again if the winner is found a defaulter.  This amounts to unfair trade practice. In the counter version the respondents admit that the bonus prize on 16/10/06 was not given to the winner as he had not remitted the kuri instalments on 15^th of the month of there after.  It was not stated  in their bye-law that the subscribers who has remitted the insalment will only be included in the bonus prize draw.

          6. Heard the counsels on both sides.  Usually the bonus prizes are declared as  an incentive to remit the kuri instalments regularly.  And the names or numbers on the subscribers who remit the kuri instalments on  or before the date of draw will only be included in the draw.  In this case the respondents admitted that the bonus prize on 16/10/06 was not given since the winner has not remitted the kuri instalment on 15^th of the month or there after.  It seems quite unfair to include a defaulted subscriber in the bonus prize draw and not giving the declared prizes when the winner is found a defaultee.

          7. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to conduct the bonus prize draw again with the names of the subscribers who remitted their instalments  on or before 16/10/2006 and give the Hero Honda bike to the winner.  They are further directed to pay  the complainant Rs.1,000/-  (Rupees One thousand only)as compensation and Rs.300/- (Rupees Three hundred only) as costs within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

          Dictated to the Confdl. Asst., transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 13th  day of December 2010.