KERALA  STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION

                    VAZHUTHACADU    THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL  NO: 168/2010

                                 JUDGMENT DATED: 21..04..2010.

PRESENT

SMT. VALSALA SARANGADHARAN                : MEMBER

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN                                   :JUDICIAL MEMBER

SRI.S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR                         : MEMBER

1.         Proprietor,

Suryadhanasree Chittees,

Kuravilangadu branch,

Kottayam.

2.         Alice

Collection Agent,

Suryadhanasree Chittees,

Kuravilangadu branch,                             : APPELLANTS

Kottayam.

3.         Lincy.C.L,

Office Staff,

Suryadhanasree Chittees,

Kuravilangadu branch,

Kottayam.

(By Adv: Sri.J.S.Asokkumar)

            Vs.

Lalu Joseph,

Madaparambath house,

Ushavoor.P.O,                                             : RESPONDENT

Pin-686 634.

                                       JUDGMENT

SHRI.M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER

The appeal is preferred from the order dated:27^th February 2010 passed by CDRF, Kottayam in CC:263/09.  The complaint therein was filed alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties in their failure to pay the assured bonus of rs.500/-.  Admittedly the complainant joined the weekly chitty conducted by the 1^st opposite party Suryadhanasree chitties and that as per the said chitty the complainant had to remit Rs.100/- per week.  The total period of the chitty was 50 weeks.  Admittedly the complainant remitted the entire subscription under the said chitty scheme and thereby he paid the total of Rs.5000/- under the said chitty scheme.  It is the definite case of the complainant that the opposite party offered bonus of Rs.500/- but at the termination of the chitty the opposite parties paid only Rs.300/- by way of bonus.  Hence the said complaint was filed.

2. The opposite party took the stand that the complainant was a defaulter and so the 1^st opposite party paid only Rs.300/- by way of bonus.  It is the definite case of the opposite party that the complainant was a defaulter in paying the amount within the stipulated time and that is why he was not given the entire bonus of Rs.500/-.  But there is nothing on record to show that the subscriber who delayed payment will not get the entire bonus of Rs.500/-.  In the absence of any such evidence, it can only be inferred that the complainant/subscriber of the said chitty is entitled to get the assured bonus of Rs.500/-, on termination of the chitty.  It is also to be noted that during the subsistence of the chitty the opposite parties never raised any such objection in paying the bonus to the complainant/subscriber.  So, the Forum below has rightly directed the opposite parties to pay the assured bonus of Rs.500/-.  There can be no doubt about the fact that the bonus amount of Rs.300/- already paid by the opposite parties can be deducted and only the balance of Rs.200/- need be paid to the complainant by way of bonus.  The Forum below is also justified in awarding compensation of Rs.1500/- for the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.  The cost of Rs.1000/- ordered by the Forum below can also be treated as reasonable.  Thus, the impugned order passed by the Forum below is to be upheld.  Hence we do so.  The present appeal deserves dismissal.

In the result the appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself.  The impugned order dated:27/2/2010 passed by  CDRF, Kottayam in CC:263/09 is confirmed.

M.V. VISWANATHAN  :JUDICIAL MEMBER

VALSALA SARANGADHARAN   : MEMBER

S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR: MEMBER

VL.