DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 7th Day of February 2012
Present : Smt.Seena H, President
: Smt. Preetha.G. Nair, Member
: Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K, Member Date of filing: 29/06/2011
(C.C.No.97/2011)
Madhusoodhanan.K,
S/o.C.P.Govindan Nambiar,
Karunyam,
Ayyappankavu Road,
Sekharipuram,
Palakkad – 678 010.
(Adv.B.Kamal Chand) - Complainant
V/s
1. Managing Director,
Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.
Bhadratha,
P.B.No.510, Museum Road,
Thrissur – 680 020.
(By Adv.M.P.Ravi)
2. The Manager,
Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.
Town Branch,
Opp.Town Railway Station,
Palakkad.
(By Adv.M.P.Ravi) - Opposite parties
O R D E R
By Smt.PREETHA.G.NAIR, MEMBER
The complainant joined the chitty numbered as 80/2007 commenced on 11/10/07 conducted by the 2nd opposite party under the control of 1st opposite party. The Chittal Number of the complainant is 70 on the Chitty No.80/07 conducted by the opposite parties. The termination of the chitty is on 6/1/2016 and the total amount is Rs.1,00,000/- The amount shall be paid in 100 equal installments as Rs.1,000/- in each month. The complainant is remitting the monthly installments regularly and promptly in the 2nd opposite party’s office and receipts were also issued. On 3rd week of March 2011 the 2nd opposite party called the complainant and stated that the complainant had already auctioned the chitty on 7/9/09 in his favour and asked why the complainant did not withdraw the prized money.
The complainant was surprised to know the fact that the chitty was auctioned in his favour. The opposite parties never informed the complainant regarding the fact that he had auctioned the chitty. It was the bounden duty of the opposite parties to inform the prized subscribers regarding the auction and ask to furnish security for releasing the prized money. Since the opposite parties have never informed the complainant he was unaware of the fact that the chitty was auctioned by him till the 2nd opposite party telephoned him on 3rd week of June 2011. Moreover the complainant was promptly remitting the monthly installments in the office of the 2nd opposite party even at that time the officials of the opposite party have never informed the complainant regarding the fact of the auction of the chitty in his favour.
If the opposite parties ought to have informed the fact of the auction in his favour, the complainant has withdrawn the prized amount and would have utilized / deposited in some other manner which would be profitable. Because of the unfair trade practice and deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties the complainant was never informed regarding the bid of the chitty in his favour in the auction for the month September 2009 in Chitty No.80/07 till the 3rd week of March 2011. After repeated demands and requests the 2nd opposite party explained the matter that it was mistake consisted by the staff of the 2nd opposite party. Because of that the complainant was put into hardships and he alone was put to suffer and forced to accept the prized money of Rs.70,000/- on 28/3/2011. The complainant is a clerk by job and to make his future life more brightful and prospective decided to join chitty. The act of opposite parties caused mental agony and stress to the complainant. The complainant sustained loss of interest for 21 months. On 16/5/11 the complainant sent a lawyer notice to the opposite parties and demanding them to pay the interest on the chitty amount for 21 months and compensation. On 31/5/11 the opposite parties sent a reply notice stating false allegations and facts. The conduct and activities of opposite parties are deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complainant prays an order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.22,050/- as the interest for 21 months and pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony and pay the cost of the proceedings.
Opposite parties filed version stating the following contentions. The opposite parties admitted that the complainant has joined in a chitty bearing No.80/07 conducted by them. At the time of joining the chitty the complainant has filled up and gave the variola. All the particulars like name and address, class of the chitty, sala, installments etc. are contained in the Variola. Subsequently when the complainant intended to bid the chitty he had executed a Proxy on 1/11/08 in respect of the chitty in favour of 2nd opposite party authorizing him to participate in the auction and to bid the chitty. The proxy once executed is valid for one year from the date of execution and as per the proxy the 2nd opposite party is authorized to bid the chitty on behalf of the complainant. So the 2nd opposite party has bid the chitty on 7/9/09 for the complainant. As per the terms and conditions of the proxy, complainant is bound to enquire about the auction and bid from time to time till the expiry of the period of the proxy. The complainant had never enquired about the auction and bid as consented and authorized the 2nd opposite party by him through the proxy. Even then 2nd opposite party has intimated to complainant as the registered letter dated 7/9/09 issued to his official address as given in the variola by the complainant. The letter was issued to the official address only because of the fact that the complainant will not be available in the residential address to receive registered article personally since he is employed. Unfortunately the letter was returned to the sender with an endorsement by the postman “Addressee Unknown.” Immediately the 2nd opposite party tried to contact the complainant over telephone but the same were in vein.
Moreover the 2nd opposite party issued every month an intimation letter to all the subscribers of the chitty including the complainant. The intimation contains the date of auction, amount of the monthly installments, subscription number of the prized subscriber of the last draw. Such intimation letter is issued to the complainant every month regularly from where he can very well know about the auction and bid. So the allegation in the complaint that the opposite party did not inform the complainant about the auction and bid the chitty in favour and he has sustained loss is not correct. Being a bank employee all these facts are very well known to the complainant. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. The attempt of the complainant is to conceal his default and to get unlawful enrichments. So the opposite parties prayed that dismiss the complaint.
Both parties filed affidavit and documents. Ext.A1 to A6 marked on the side of the complainant. Ext.B1 to B5 marked on the side of the opposite parties. Complainant and 2nd opposite party was examined as PW1 and DW1 respectively. Matter was heard.
Issues to be considered are
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ?
2) If so, what is the relief and cost ?
Issues 1 & 2
Heard both parties and going through the records, admittedly the complainant has joined in a chitty bearing no.80/07 conducted by 2nd opposite party. In Ext.A1 shows the official address of complainant mentioned that Clerk, Co-Operative Central Bank, Palakkad. Also Ext.A1 shows the permanent address of complainant . In Ext.B4 the 2nd opposite party issued a registered letter in the official address of complainant. Ext.B4 returned with endorsement that “No such addressee at PDC Main Branch” Ext.B5 shows the intimation letter that subscription number of the prized subscriber of last draw was 70. But the opposite parties have not produced evidence to show that Ext.B5 sent to the complainant. Address of the complainant was not mentioned in Ext.B5. At the time of cross examination the 2nd opposite party deposed that intimation given to the holder at the time of getting chitty. Further 2nd opposite party deposed that as per proxy conditions complainant is bound to enquire about the auction and bid from time to time till the expiry of the period of the proxy. In the present case at the time of cross examination the complainant deposed that he had enquired about the auction on every month and the officials of opposite parties said that to issue intimation. No contradictory evidence produced by the opposite parties. Further more the 2nd opposite party deposed that he has not known that the complainant enquired about the auction in the office.
The 2nd opposite party bid the chitty on 7/9/2009 for the complainant and sent the registered letter dated 7/9/09 to the official address of the complainant. Unfortunately the letter returned with endorsement that “No such addressee at PDC Main branch”. The address of the complainant in Ext.B4 is the same in Ext.A1. The complainant stated that he had only signed in Ext.A1 and not written. The opposite parties have not disputed regarding the complainant has not written in Ext.A1. The opposite parties failed to prove letters sent to the complainant in the official address. The permanent address of the complainant also mentioned in Ext.A1. There is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties to not given proper intimation to the complainant about the chitty transaction. In Ext.B2 the proxy clearly mentioned the complainant should enquired about the auction and bid of the chitty. No evidence was produced by the complainant to show that he enquired about the auction to the opposite parties. Ext.A3 series shows that complainant has paid the monthly installments. So we cannot considered the interest of Rs.70,000/- for 21 months. In Ext.A2 shows that Rs.69,401/- paid on 28/3/2011. Moreover the opposite parties not produced document to show that proper intimation given to the complainant before March 2011 regarding the bid of the chitty. So the chitty amount was deposited in opposite parties till 28/3/2011 and no interest was given to complainant. The opposite parties have not sent letters to the complainant’s permanent address mentioned in Ext.A1. It is a fit case for awarding compensation for deficiency in service.
In view of the above discussion we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. In the result the complaint partly allowed. We direct the opposite parties jointly and severally liable to pay the complainant an amount of Rs.13,000/- (Rupees Thirteen thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of order, till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 7th day of February 2012
Sd/-
Seena.H
President
Sd/-
Preetha G Nair
Member
Sd/-
Bhanumathi.A.K.
Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant
1.Ext. A1 – Photostat copy of variola
2. Ext. A2 – Photostat copy of chitty pass book
3. Ext. A3 series – Receipts (24 nos.) issued by opposite parties
4. Ext. A4 – Copy of lawyer notice dated 16/5/11sent to opposite parties
5. Ext.A5 – Acknowledgement cards
6. Ext.A6 – Reply to lawyer notice dated 31/5/11
Complainant examined
PW1 – K.Madhusoodanan
Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite Party
1.Ext. B1 – Photostat copy of Variola
2.Ext. B2 – Proxy Form signed by complainant
3.Ext. B3 – True copy of Chitty Personal Ledger
4. Ext. B4 – Letter dated 7/9/09 sent to complainant
5.Ext.B5 – Intimation letter
Witness examined on the side of opposite party
DW1 – Hemachandran.S
Costs
Rs.1,000/- Allowed as cost of the proceedings.
