AT HYDERABAD.

FA.No.1023/2005 against CD.No.84/2004 District Consumers Forum, Khammam.

Between-

M/s.Ushasri Chit Funds (Pvt.) Ltd.

Gandhi Gunj,  Khammam Town,

Rep. by its Foreman Sri K.Veerabhadra Rao.

…AppellantOpp.Party.

And

Karnati Phanideep, S/o.Ramesh,

R/o.Palvancha,

Camp- Khammam, Khammam District.

…Respondent/Complainant.

Counsel for the Appellant                 -  Mr.M.V.S.Suresh Kumar.

Counsel for the Respondent             -  Respondent Served.

QUORUM-THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,

SMT.M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE LADY MEMBER,

AND

SRI G. BHOOPATHI REDDY, HON’BLE MALE MEMBER.

MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH,

TWO THOUSAND EIGHT.

Oral Order (Per Hon’ble Mr.Justice D.Appa Rao, President)

-------

            Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.  None appears for the respondent despite publication is made. 

1.         The opposite party preferred this appeal against the order of the District Consumer Forum, Khammam, dated 05.05.2005 in CD.No.84/2004. 

2.         The case of the complainant is that he joined as a member in the chit group of opposite party for Rs.50,000/-.  He was paying monthly instalments through his nephew till the maturity period of the chit.  The chit fund amount was payable to him.  However, when he approached the appellant and requested to pay the chit amount, it had refused to pay the same without assigning any reason.  Therefore, he gave a notice on 26.03.2003 demanding them to pay the chit amounts.  However, it did not give any reply. 

3.         The opposite party did not choose to contest, though it has put in appearance through an advocate. 

4.         On that the District Forum passed an order  directing the opposite party to pay the total chit amount of Rs.50,000/- with interest at 12percent per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 24.03.2004 till the date of realization, besides costs of Rs.500/-. 

5.         Aggrieved by the said order, the opposite party preferred this appeal contending that there was no evidence to show that the complainant was a member of the chit group for Rs.50,000/-, nor any particulars were given in order to find whether he was in fact a member of the chit.  The District Forum ought not to have allowed the complaint without any evidence to that effect. 

6.         The point that arises for consideration is whether the order of the District Forum is sustainable under law?

7.         Evidently, the complainant/respondent herein filed a complaint  under Sec.12 – A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking Rs.50,000/- from the appellant Chit Fund Company on the ground that he was a member of the  chit group run by it.  Curiously he did not give any particulars, viz. the chit group number, the period for which the chit fund group was started , etc. He did not file any documents.  Unless there is exfacie evidence to state that he was a member of the chit group, the District Forum cannot allow the complaint solely on the ground that the opposite party did not choose to contest before it.  The District Forum has to satisfy itself as to the averments made in the complaint.  When the very complainant did not file any document whatsoever to show that he was a member of the chit group, granting amount would undoubtedly result in injustice.  The appellant should equally be blamed, in the sense that having chosen to engage an advocate did not file counter, nor any document to substantiate the plea raised in this appeal.  We do not see any reason to go into the defence that was taken in the appeal by the opposite party.  Since the complainant did not choose to contest the appeal, we are handicapped, in the sense that we do not know the version of the complainant in regard to the alleged receipts said to have been issued by the appellant acknowledging the receipt of amount .  It may also be stated herein that according to the appellant one K. Pani Pradeep S/o.Ramu was a member.  The complaint shown his name as Karnati Phanideep, S/o.Ramesh.  Undoubtedly, all these questions have to be gone into in order to find out genuineness of the claim. 

8.         Therefore, we deem it a fit case where the matter has to be remitted to the District Forum for fresh adjudication.  The complainant/respondent herein did not choose to contest the appeal.  The District Forum is directed to issue notice to the complainant or his advocate and proceed with the enquiry by giving an opportunity to the appellant to file counter by fixing the date.  Since the matter pertains to the year 2004, the appellant is directed to appear before the District Forum on 03.04.2008 without fail.

9.         The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

PRESIDENT               LADY MEMBER               MALE MEMBER

Dt-10.03.2008.

Vvr.