DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 31st day of May, 2023
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member Date of filing: 27/11/2021
CC/211/2021
Jayanthi
W/o Kumar Das, Sowparnika
Nellaya (P.O), Chepulassery
Ottapalam – 679 335 - Complainant
(By Adv. M/s Viju.K.Raphel & Athira.S)
V/s
1. Girija Devi
D/o Raghavan, Pazhanikalathil
(Kuthanur Parambu), Kulapully
Shoranur, Ottapalam – 679 122
2. Mohandas
S/o Krishnan
Kailiyade Uppathra
Chalavara, Ottapalam – 679 122 - Opposite parties
(Both opposite parties by Adv. K.P.Abdul Hakeem)
O R D E R
By Smt. Vidya.A, Member
1. Pleadings of the complainant in brief
Complainant subscribed to a chitty conducted by the opposite parties in pursuant to their request. The total sala of the chitty amounts to Rs.1,80,000/- The Chitty was for a total period of 60 months with a monthly instalment of Rs. 3,000/- The complainant joined the chitty on 15/01/2017 and paid monthly instalments of Rs. 3,000/- as agreed. On 15/01/2020, when the period of the chitty was over, she approached the opposite parties for obtaining the amount of Rs. 1,55,100/- as per their agreement. The opposite parties initially agreed to pay the amount by 31/12/2020; but later on changed the date to 31/01/2021. However, even after that period, the opposite parties did not give the money. The complainant came to know that many other subscribers to the chitty had similar issues with the opposite parties.
The 1st opposite party sent a voice message to the complainant and some other subscribers of the chitty, that the amount will be given once she sell the house in the name of the 2nd opposite party. But the opposite parties did not give the money. The complainant along with other people who has to get money from the opposite parties had a meeting in the Municipal Councillor’s house and opposite parties requested 6 months time to settle the matter. So they gave time upto 31/08/2021 for payment. Even after that the opposite parties did not make payment. The complainant along with nine others lodged a complaint against the opposite parties in the Shoranur Police Station on 12/09/2021. The opposite parties promised to give post dated cheques. But they did not keep their promise. The police categorised the case as civil nature and asked the complainants to file suit before the court and closed the matter.
So the complainant approached this Commission for an order directing the opposite parties
- To pay Rs 1,55,100/- together with 12% interest.
- To pay Rs. 10,000/- being the cost incurred by her.
- Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered by her. Rs.20,000/- for the financial loss and Rs. 25,000/- as cost of this litigation.
2. Complaint was admitted and notices were issued to the opposite parties. The opposite parties entered appearance. The opposite parties filed application to hear maintainability as preliminary issue. The Commission heard the preliminary issue as to whether a prima-facie case is made out by the complainant and came to a conclusion that with the available documents, the complaint is maintainable.
3. Complainant filed proof affidavit and Exts. A1 to A3 marked.
4. Eventhough this Commission had made a mistaken order that the opposite parties had filed version, it transpired that the document filed was not version, but an application. Hence proceedings are ex-parte against the opposite parties.
5. As per the complaint, the complainant joined the chitty conducted by the opposite parties as per their request. The total sala of the chitty was Rs.1,80,000/- for a period of 60 months with Rs. 3,000/- as monthly instalment. After the completion of the chitty period, the complainant approached the opposite parties for getting the money. But they did not pay the amount saying one or the other reasons. So the complainant along with 9 person lodged complaint before the Shoranur Police Station. They closed the complaint with a statement that being a civil dispute; the complainant has to approach court for settling the dispute.
6. Complainant produced 3 documents in support of her claim. Ext. A1 is the copy of the complaint lodged before the Shoranur Police Station. Ext. A2 is the copy of the statement of the police closing the complaint. Ext. A3 is a CD containing the voice message, picture message and phone call accompanied by an unauthenticated transcription prepared by the complainant.
7. Complainant has not produced any receipts showing the payment made by her to the opposite parties or any document showing the existence of chitty transaction between them. So the complainant did not produce enough documents to prove her case. In the absence of cogent evidence and documents to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, we are not inclined to allow the prayer in the complaint.
Further, the voice messages which the complainant claims to be that of the opposite parties are not proved.
Thus as the complainant has failed to produce any evidence, complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in open court on this the 31st day of May, 2023.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya.A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K.
Member
APPENDIX
Documents marked from the side of the complainant:
Ext. A1: Copy of the complaint lodged before the Shoranur Police Station.
Ext. A2: Copy of the statement of the police closing the complaint.
Ext. A3: CD containing the voice message, picture message and phone call
accompanied by transcription given by the complainant.
Documents marked from the side of opposite parties: Nil
Witness examined from the complainant’s side: Nil
Witness examined from the opposite parties side: Nil
Cost: Nil
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.
