By Sri.P.K.Sasi, President :

          The case of the complainant is that he has joined in a kuri conducted by the opposite parties started from 07/05/14 with monthly installment of Rs.500/- and he has paid 21 installments without any default. He could not continue the kuri thereafter, since the opposite parties stopped functioning of the company without settling the kuri transactions of the customers. The act of the opposite parties stopping the functioning of the company without settling the kuri transactions amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part. Hence a lawyer notice was issued on 16/01/15 but no relief received. Hence this complaint is filed.

          2) On receiving the complaint, notice was issued to all the opposite parties whereas, except 2^nd & 4^th opposite parties others neither appeared before the Forum nor submitted any version hence set ex-parte.

          3) In the version filed by the 2^nd opposite party he has denied all the allegations stated in the complaint against him. According to the 2^nd opposite party there is no nexus between him and the 1^st opposite party company. He has retired from the Board of Directors w.e.f 20/11/12 and the kuri alleged in this complaint is started from 2014 onwards. According to him he has retired from the company by complying the respective provision of the Companies Act. He also stated details of the present office bearers of the company. In his version he has stated in detail several internal disputes happened in the company and also the details of related criminal cases etc. The 2^nd opposite party strictly denied the allegations raised against him and stated that he has not collected any amount from the complainant and also he has not given any assurance to the complainant regarding the repayment of amount. He prayed for dismissal of the compliant with compensatory cost.

          4) 4^th opposite party in her separate version denied all the allegation raised by the complainant. According to the 4^th opposite party there is no connection for her with the opposite party company and she is not a Director of the company as stated in the complaint. She further submitted that w.e.f 02/05/14 she has retired from the company by complying the respective provisions of the Companies Act. Therefore, she cannot be held liable for any liability of the company as stated in the compliant. She further submitted that her name is included in this compliant with an ulterior motive to make undue gain from her and prayed for the dismissal of the compliant with compensatory cost.

          5) Then the case was posted for evidence and the points for consideration was that

                   a) whether there was any deficiency in service or unfair

                       trade practice happened on the part of any of the

                       opposite parties ?

                   b) if so what cost and relief ?

          6) From the side of complainant he has appeared before the Forum and submitted proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the compliant in detail. He also produced 3 documents which are marked as Exts. P1 to P3. Ext. P1 is the kuri passbook; Ext. P2 is the copy of lawyer notice with postal receipt dtd. 17/01/15 and Ext. P3 is the unclaimed notice by the 1^st opposite party. From the side of 2^nd opposite party he has appeared before the Forum and submitted counter proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and described all the contentions raised in his version in detail. He also produced 3 documents which are marked as Exts. R1 to R3. Ext. R1 is the Notary attested copy of Retirement Deed; Ext. R2 is the copy of public notice and Ext. R3 is the copy of FIR No.2399/2014 of Kunnamkulam Police Station. He was also examined as RW1. The 4^th opposite party neither filed any counter proof affidavit nor produced any documents. The complainant and 2^nd opposite party filed argument notes and we heard in detail also. 

          7) According to the complainant he has joined in a kuri conducted by the opposite parties and he could not continue the kuri after 21^st installments since the opposite parties have stopped functioning of the company. The contesting opposite parties contented that they had retired from the company since they have no connection with the 1^st  opposite party company after their retirement. Hence they cannot be held liable. We have gone through the contents of affidavits filed by the complainant and 2^nd opposite party also produced documents. Ext. P1 would go to show that the complainant had joined in a kuri as stated in the complaint and he also remitted the 21 installments without any default. The documents produced by 2^nd opposite party which are marked as Exts. R1 to R3 would go to show that he had retired from the company legally by complying the required provisions of the Companies Act. Admittedly, the kuri started after the retirement of the 2^nd opposite party. However, the 4^th opposite party is also contended that she has retired from the company, neither any documents produced nor any evidence adduced  to that effect.

          Considering the points discussed hereinabove, we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get the amount paid by him towards the 21 installment of the kuri Rs.10,500/- from the company with some reasonable interest. By denying that amount the 1^st opposite party company has committed deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice towards the complainant. Since the 2^nd opposite party had proved his retirement from the company with sufficient proof he could not be held liable to discharge the liability of the 1^st opposite party company.

          In the result, we allow this complaint and the 1^st opposite party company is directed to return Rs.10,500/- (Rupees Ten thousand five hundred only) with 9% interest from 24/09/14 onwards to the complainant along with Rs.2,000/- as cost of this complaint to the complainant within one month from receiving copy of this order. Failing which, the complainant is entitled to get 9% interest till realization.

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 31^st day of October 2018.

             Sd/-                                                                      Sd/-

M.P.Chandrakumar                                                     P.K.Sasi,

Member                                                                        President.                     

                                      Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits :

Ext. P1 kuri passbook

Ext. P2 copy of lawyer notice with postal receipt dtd. 17/01/15

Ext. P3 unclaimed notice by the 1^st opposite party

Opposite parties Exhibits :                                                            

Ext. R1 Notery attested copy of Retirement Deed

Ext. R2 copy of public notice

Ext. R3 copy of FIR No.2399/2014 of Kunnamkulam Police Station. 

Opposite Parties Witness :

RW 1 Vasudevan K.K.

                                                                                         Id/-                                                                                                      President