IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KOLLAM

Dated this the    13^th  Day of  July  2021

  Present: -  Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LL.M. President

        Smt.S.Sandhya Rani, Bsc, L.L.B,Member

                   Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

                                                                                                CC.177/18

Sheeja Unni                                       :         Complainant

W/o Unni.K

Charuvila Veedu

Kulamada P.O, Kollam.

PIN:691574

[By Adv.Z.A.Sukul Khadar]

Vs

Manager                                            :         Opposite party

KSFE

Anandavalleswaram Branch

Kollam-691013

[By Adv.Jyolsna.J.G]

       FINAL ORDER

E.M.MUHAMMED IBRAHIM , B.A, LL.M,President

          This is a case based on a consumer complaint filed u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. 

          The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-

On 30.10.2008 the complaint joined in chitty No.165/2008 with the opposite party.  The chital number of the said chitty is 61.  The said chitty was proposed to be terminated on 23.01.2017  at its 100^th months installment.  The complainant was regularly paying the installment up to 79^th month as the complainant’s mother and sister-in-low suddenly fell and sustained huge financial liability.  She was unable to pay the further installments.  However on 23.09.2015 the complainant managed to obtain some money and approached the opposite party with a request to regularize the defaulted installments.  But the opposite party refused to receive the amount and regularize the chitty by stating lame excuses.  Again on 29.01.2016 the complainant approached the opposite party with a request to regularize the chitty or to return the installments already paid by the complainant.  But the opposite party pacified the complainant by telling that they will clear everything as early as possible permitting the complainant to continue the said chitty.  However later it was learned that the above number chitty was transferred from the name of the complainant by denying the complainant’s opportunity to continue the chitty by allowing him to regularize the chital which caused much mental shock to the complainant.  The complainant caused to send a lawyer notice demanding Rs.2,00,000/- being the remitted chitty installments and its interest and also demanding compensation for causing physical and mental agony to the complainant due to  deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party for not regularizing the said chitty.  The conduct of the opposite party in not regularizing the chitty has caused irreparable  hardship to the complainant and his family.  Hence the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant.

          Opposite party resisted the complaint by filing a detailed written version.  The opposite party would admit that the complainant has joined the chitty No.165/2008 as chital no.61.  The sala of the said chitty was Rs.2000/-.  The said chitty commenced on 30.10.2008 and having 100 installment and that the complainant has paid  79 installment and thereafter the complainant has become a chronic defaulter.  Even after several reminders through phone call and letters including registered letter the complainant had not turned up and regularized the chitty.  The chitty was terminated on 23.01.2017 and the KSFE has not transferred the chitty to some other persons by denying the opportunity of the complainant to continue the chitty and only on 98^th auction conducted on 23.11.2016 the KSFE has substituted the chitty. The opposite party admitted to have received the lawyer notice sent by the complainant but would content that they have issued a reply notice informing the willingness to the opposite party to return the remitted installment  and also advising the complainant to approach the branch with relevant records.  Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part  of the opposite party.  The complainant has no cause of action to file a complaint against opposite party.  The complainant approached this Forum with ulterior motive to defame the reputation of KSFE by raising unfounded and baseless allegations against the opposite party on an experimental basis inorder to obtain unlawful gain.  The complainant is not entitled to get the relief sought for  and further pray to dismiss the complaint with cost of  the opposite party. 

In view of the above pleadings the points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party in the chitty transaction alleged in this case?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief sought for?
3. Reliefs and costs.

Evidence on the side of the complainant consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Ext.P1 and P2 documents.  Evidence on the side of the opposite party consists of  the oral evidence of DW1 and Ext.B1 to B7 documents.  Both sides have filed notes of argument but not advanced any oral argument,  though sufficient opportunity was granted  for the same.

Point No.1&2

     For avoiding repetition of discussion of materials these 2 points are considered together.  There is no dispute  with regard to the following facts.  The complainant had joined chitty No.165/2008 with the opposite party and the chital number is 61 and total period of the chitty was 100 months.  The complainant had paid 79^th installment and thereafter she has defaulted the chitty.  The chitty would end on 23.11.2017 that the complainant has sent Ext.P2 lawyer notice for which the opposite party has sent Ext.B6 reply notice stating that the opposite parties are ready to return the amount of installment remitted by the complainant.  It is also stated in B6 notice that the complainant had remitted only 79 installment and thereafter defaulted the chitty.  Subsequently after several reminders the opposite party substituted the chitty on its 98^th auction on 23.11.2016 which is just 2 months before the closure of the chitty.  It is clear from the available materials including the oral evidence of  DW1 and Ext.B1 to B3, Ext.B6 and B7 documents that the opposite party KSFE had given sufficient time and opportunity to regularize the chitty.  But the complainant unfortunately had not approached the opposite party with relevant records and regularized the chitty.  Ext.B7 is the postal acknowledgement card evidencing the receipt of B6 lawyer notice by the counsel for the complainant.

     The specific allegation of the complainant is that she had paid 79^th installment and thereafter her mother and sister-in-low  fell ill causing huge financial burden upon the complainant and therefore she could not continue to pay the chitty installment.  However the complainant approached the opposite party several times seeking to regularize the chitty.  The said request was turned down by stating lame excuses.  The above  version of the complainant appears to be incorrect,  in view of Ext.B2 notice dated 02.10.2016 wherein  it is stated that she has defaulted 17 installment till that date and after deducting veethapalisa an amount of Rs.35963/- along with interest @ 12% has to be remitted to regularize the chitty on or before 13.10.2016.  Ext.B3 and B5 would show that the above notice has been sent by the opposite party and served on the complainant.  Only after sending the above notice the chitty was substituted on its 98^th installment which is after the expiry of the stipulated date specified in the notice.  In view of the above materials on record it is clear that even after receiving registered notice the complainant has not turned up and regularized the defaulted chitty.  It is also brought out in evidence that only on 23.11.2016 at the eve of the chitty period the chitty was substituted for a loss of Rs.1234/-.  Ext.B4 personal register in respect of the complainant would substantiate that aspect.  According to the complainant no notice was given to her before substituting the chitty.  But the above allegation appears to be incorrect in the light of the evidence tendered by  DW1.  According to DW1 an unprized chitty happened to be substituted only one notice need be sent and such a notice(Ext.B4) has already been sent.  In the light of the above materials on record there is no merit in the above allegation.

 It is also brought out in evidence that in paragraph 4 of Ext.B6 reply notice it is clearly requested the complainant’s counsel to advise the complainant to approach the KSFE with clients chitty pass book, ID proof and relevant records and receive the amount due to her towards the chitty installment paid by the complainant.  It is also stated in paragraph 4 of the reply notice that the opposite party is willing to settle the matter at the earliest.  During cross examination by the learned counsel for the opposite party PW1 would also admit that the opposite party had offered the amount remitted by her but she has refused to receive it as the opposite party has agreed to pay only the amount paid by the complainant as installment.  It is clear from the available materials that in paragraph 4 of the argument note the learned counsel for the opposite party has stated that the opposite party is always ready to pay chitty amount to the complainant together with veethapalisa.  As the complainant is a chronic defaulter right from 79^th installment of  the chitty and she has not regularized the chitty inspite of receiving  legal notice sent by the opposite party,  it cannot be said that there is any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy  of  quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by KSFE in connection with chitty transactions.

     On evaluating the entire materials available on record we come to the conclusion that the complainant has not succeeded in establishing that there is any deficiency in service or any unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party in the alleged chitty transaction.  We find no merit in the complaint and the same is only to be dismissed.  The points answered accordingly. 

In the result the complaint stands dismissed with the following observation.

As the opposite party has already admitted in the written version as well as during evidence stage and in the notes of argument they are ready to return the amount of  installment together with veethapalisa the complainant can receive the same on production of  the relevant records. 

The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant  Smt. Deepa.S transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the  Open Commission this the  13^th   day of  July  2021.

E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-

S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-

          Stanly Harold:Sd/-

          Forwarded/by Order

                                                                                  Senior Superintendent

INDEX

Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:-

PW1           :  Sheeja Unni

Documents marked for the  complainant

Ext.P1         : Original chitty pass book          

Ext.P2         : Copy of notice

Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-

DW1           :Sanalkumar.V.S

Documents marked for opposite party:-

Ext.B1        : Receipt book of postal registration

Ext.B2        : Notice dated 03.10.2016

Ext.B3        :Account statement

Ext.B4        :Chitty personal register

Ext.B5        :Postal receipt

Ext.B6        : Copy of  reply notice

Ext.B7        : Acknowledgement card

E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-

S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-

            Stanly Harold:Sd/-

           Forwarded/by Order

                                                                                   Senior Superintendent