O R D E R
By Smt.Rajani.P.S,, Member
The complainant’s case is as follows: The st complainant was a subscriber of the 10th day quarterly kuri as per statement No.20 conducted by the respondent kuri company. He had paid regularly towards the said kuri an amount of Rs.80,000/- till 32 instalments on 10/11/05. After that the respondent stopped the kuri business. So he demanded for the paid kuri amount. Subsequently the respondent returned Rs.25,000/- and also given a cheque for Rs.25,000/-. But the said cheque was dishonoured. A criminal case was filed in Judicial First Class Magistrate No.II Court, Thrissur for the same. Due to the above said acts of the respondent he had suffered severe mental agony and met financial loss. The act of the respondent amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complaint.
2. The 1st complainant was died within the period of complaint and the complaint was amended as per IA.338/10 and the wife of the deceased was amended as 2nd complainant.
3. The counter filed by the respondent : The complainant has not followed the kuri viampu and as the dispute is with regard to kuri viampu the complaint is to be filed in Civil Court. It is true that the complainant had subscribed a kuri from this respondent. But this respondent denies the facts that he had paid 32 instalments and is entitled to get an amount of Rs.80,000/- and this respondent stopped kuri after 32 instalments. The complainant had not regularly paid the kuri and made defaults in the kuri. So he made a loss to this respondent. He is entitled to get any amount only after the maturity of the kuri without interest. The details regarding these matter has already stated in the kuri viampu. So the statement made by the complainant is false and hence denied. Hence dismiss with costs.
4. Points for consideration :
1) Was there any deficiency in service on the part of the respondent?
2) If so reliefs and costs ?
5. The evidence consists of Exhibit P1. The complainant filed affidavit but the respondent submitted no cross.
6. The complaint was filed to get back the paid kuri amount. The husband of the 2nd complainant was a subscriber of the kuri conducted by the respondent. He paid regularly for the kuri till 32 instalments and could not continue the kuri after 32 instalments as the respondent stopped the kuri. Upon his demand the respondent paid Rs.25,000/- and also given a cheque for Rs.25,000/- but the said cheque was returned as insufficient fund. So he is entitled to get the balance kuri amount.
7. The respondent in their counter simply denied the statements made by the complainant. The respondent stated that the complainant defaulted the kuri and made loss for them.
8. Exhibit P1 is the kuri pass book which shows that the 1st complainant had paid regularly towards the kuri and paid 32 instalments. It also shows that he had received Rs.25,000/- towards the kuri amount. It is the definite case of the 1st complainant that the cheque issued by the respondent was dishonoured and a criminal case was filed regarding the same. There is no evidence to disprove this statement made by the 1st complainant. So it is to be considered that he received only Rs.25,000/- towards the paid kuri amount. Therefore the 2nd complainant is entitled to get the balance of the kuri amount. Exhibit P1 shows that the said kuri was matured n 10th May 2010. So he is entitled to get back the paid kuri amount deducting an amount of Rs.25,000/-The non-return of the paid kuri amount even after maturity shows deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
9. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondent is directed to return Rs.55,000/- with 12% interest from the date of maturity and also to pay Rs.500/- as costs within one month from the date of receipt of copy of order.
Dictated to the Confdl. Asst., transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 14th day of November 2011.
