BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad B.A., LL.B., President
Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member
Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy B. Com., LL.B., Member
Thursday the 21st day of July, 2005
CD No. 63/2005
E. Sreenivasulu,
Advocate,
H.No. 63/41,
Chidambar Rao Street,
Kurnool. . . . Complainant
-Vs-
Foreman,
M/s. Subramanyeswara Chit
Funds Pvt Ltd,
Kondaveedu Towers,
16th line, Arundalpet,
Guntur-2. . . . Opposite party
This complaint coming on 21.7.2005 for arguments in the presence of Sri P.Sivasudarshan, Advocate for complainant and opposite party set exparte for consideration till this day, the Forum made following.
O R D E R
(As per Smt C.Preethi, Member)
1. This CD complaint of the complainant is filed under section 11 and 12 of C.P.Act, 1986 seeking a direction on the opposite party to pay cumulative chit amount of Rs. 60,000/- with 18% inter per annum from 19.8.2003 till realization, Rs. 2,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, costs of the complainant and any other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitle in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the complainant joined the opposite party Branch Office at Kurnool as subscriber/ member in chit No. ST4LK-22 run by the said Branch Office. The total value of the chit amount is Rs. 1,00,000/- having 25 members for a period of 25 months and the complainant joined the said chit on 9.8.2003 and paid installments up to 15 months totaling cumulative amount of Rs. 60,000/-. The complainant in the 15 month participated in the open auction and was successful bidder. The opposite party without paying the bid amount suddenly closed the doors of its Branch Office in Kurnool. The opposite party unlawfully, unreasonably without any reasonable cause did not pay the bid amount to the complainant hence, the said attitude of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service to the complainant.
3. The complainant in support of his case relied on the following documents Viz (1) pass book of the complainant issued by opposite party Branch Office at Kurnool and (2) paper clipping of Eenadu News Paper, Kurnool Edition, pertaining to page No.11, dt 18.11.2004, besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant in reiteration of its complaint avernments and the above documents are marked as Ex A.1 and A.2 for its appreciation in this case.
4. In pursuance of the notice as to this case of the complainant the opposite party did not appear before the Forum through out the case proceedings and were made exparte.
5. Hence, the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is remaining entitle alleging deficiency of service on part of opposite party?:-
6. It is the case of complainant that he was a member/ subscriber of opposite party Chit Company, Branch Office at Kurnool bearing chit No. ST4LK-22 and chit value is Rs. 1,00,000/- and paid installments till 15 months and participated in bid in 15th month and was a successful bidder the opposite party, Branch Office at Kurnool did not pay the bid amount and turned the boards without informing the complainant. The complainant in support of his case relied on Ex A.1 and A.2. The Ex A.1 is the pass book issued by opposite party, Branch Office at Kurnool to the complainant. It envisages the complainant as its subscriber/ member bearing chit reference No. ST4LK-22 and the value of chit is Rs. 1,00,000/- for a period of 25 months. It also further envisage that the complainant paid 15 installments totaling the cumulative amount of Rs. 60,000/-. The Ex A.2 is the news paper clipping of Eenadu news paper of Kurnool District Edition pertaining to page No. 11 dt 18.12.2004 it envisages the opposite party Branch Office at Kurnool turned the boards and the management took away the amount of Rs. 35 lakhs collected from the public and the where abouts are not know to the subscribers.
7. The facts so envisaged in Ex A.1 and A.2 and the complaint avernments and the complainant’s sworn affidavit averment are not denied by the opposite party and hence, there appears every bonafidies in the claim of the complainant. Hence, in the circumstances discussed above there is clear deficiency of service on part of opposite party in not paying the said amount to the complainant. Thus, the said lapsive conduct of opposite party is amounting to deficiency of service to the complainant consumer and there by the grievances of the complainant are covered under C.P. Act and there arises liability on part of opposite party.
8. Therefore, in the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to pay to the complainant the cumulative amount of Rs. 60,000/- to the complainant with 12% interest from 19.10.2004 till realization, along with Rs. 2,000/- as costs of the case within a month of the receipt of this order.
Dictation to the Stenographer, Type to dictation corrected by us, pronounced in the Open Court this the 21th day of July, 2005.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant For the opposite party
-Nil- -Nil-
List of Exhibits Marked
For the complainant For the opposite party
Ex A.1 Is the pass book issued by
opposite party, Branch office
at Kurnool to the complainant.
-Nil-
Ex A.2.Is the news paper clipping of
Eenadu news paper of Kurnool
District Edition pertaining to
page No.11, dt 18.12.2004.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
Copy was delivered to parties:
