IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KOLLAM

Dated this the  27^th Day of  April   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.150/2016

C.S.Anilkumar                                                           :         Complainant

S/o Sreedharan Pillai

Chettisseri Veedu,

Mullikkala Muri, Thevalakkara Village

[By Adv.S.Abraham]

V/s

1.  Managing Director                                 :         Opposite parties

          Kerala State Financial Enterprises

         Bhadratha, Thrissur.

2. Senior Manager

         K.S.F.E Main Branch,Karunagappally.

3. Regional Manager

         KSFE Regional Office,Chinnakkada, Kollam.

4. M.B.Roy

        Senior Manager

        KSFE Main Branch, Karunagappally

5. Harikumar

Assistant Manager,KSFE Main Branch, Karunagappally.

[By Adv.Sudheer Bose&Adv.S.Jayaprakash]

6. Deepa

        W/o Binu lal,

       Jyothsna,Puthanchantha, Vallikkunnam

       Alapuzha.

7. Binulal

          Jyothsna

        Puthanchantha, Vallikkunnam

        Alapuzha.

FINAL ORDER

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

1. This is a consumer complaint filed u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against KSFE, its office bearers and 2 others.
2. The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-

          The complainant has joined chitty No.45/10 and his chital number is 84.  The 6^th opposite party is the chital No.63 of the above chitty and 7^th opposite party is her husband.  On 24.05.2016 at about 1 p.m the auction of chitty No.68 was scheduled to be conducted.  At about 12.55 noon the complainant arrived at the 5^th opposite party main branch of KSFE, Karunagappally.  At that time the 5^th  opposite party Assistant Manager and one lady was present at the hall where auction was scheduled to be conducted and they were engaged in doing computer work in their respective table.  Two more persons were present at the hall.  At about 1.15 pm the complainant enquired why auction was not started.  At that time the 5^th opposite party directed the lady staff who was present to obtain the signature of the persons who present at the hall to take part in the auction.  The said lady staff has obtained signature of the complainant.  But the signature of other 2 persons were not obtained as they were present at the hall to take part in the draw.  There after the 5^th  opposite party declared that the auction of chitty No.45/2010 will  be commenced and also stated the lady staff that those who have not given proxy have not paid chitty subscription.  The 5^th opposite party started the auction by stating Rs.475000/-.  During this time the 7^th opposite party came running at the hall by carrying a chitty pass book and declared that he is the husband of one Deepa(6^th opposite party).  He has also entrusted the chitty pass book to the 5^th opposite party who in turn told the lady staff that the said person represents the 6^th opposite party Deepa.  Immediately the lady staff obtained the signature of the 7^th opposite party at the register and thereafter the 5^th opposite party restated the auction at Rs.475000/-.  The 7^th opposite party stated Rs.474000/-.  There upon the complainant stated Rs.473000/-.  The 7^th opposite party stated Rs.472000/ - and the complainant stated Rs.471000/- and the auction continued till the 7^th opposite party stated Rs.468000/-.  During this time the complainant challenged the authority of the 7^th opposite party  to participate in the auction and enquired whether the 6^th opposite party has given any authorization to take part in the auction.  Thereupon the 5^th opposite party told that no authorization has been given  but proxy has been given and also told that if the wife is the chital no separate authorization is required for the husband to participate in the auction.  During this time the complainant enquired whether the subscription for the month of May was paid by the 7^th opposite party and also demanded to show the receipt evidencing the payment of subscription for the month of  May.  The 7^th opposite party has not produced any receipt but stated that his wife (6^th opposite party) might have paid the amount and as the matter was urgent he has proceeded to the auction hall to participate in the auction.  Dissatisfied with the above reply the complainant told the 5^th opposite party that the 7^th opposite party is not eligible to participate in the auction.  Thereupon the 5^th opposite party told the complainant that if he is having any grievance he has to voice the same before the Branch Manager and also continued the auction and hence the complainant has discontinued in participating the auction.  But the 5^th opposite party concluded the auction for Rs.4,68,000/- stated by the 7^th opposite party.  After the draw of the other chitty he attempted to go to the cabin of the Senior Manager.  Thereupon the 5^th opposite party told him to put his signature for the amount suggested by the complainant.  Accordingly he put his signature in the register shown by the 5^th opposite party.  Though he went to the cabin of  Senior Manager,  the Senior Manager was not available at the seat hence he went to the cabin of Junior Manager and described the things that happened at the auction hall.  Thereupon the Junior Manager told him that nobody will be allowed to participate in the auction without proxy.  Thereupon the complainant told him that proxy is not sufficient but authorization is required to participate in the auction by a 3^rd party and also insisted to show the authorization.  Immediately the Junior Manager evaded by stating that the Senior Manager is the person who deal with all these things and also told him that the official who has conducted the auction is available and he can enquire about the facts to the said official.  As the complainant was having no other option he intimated the fact to the Senior Manager over phone and the said Senior Manager assured that he will take appropriate auction.  At this time the Junior Manager told him that the Senior Manager will be available at 2.30 pm.  The complainant is also directed to file written complaint before the Senior Manager.  At about 2.45 pm the complainant prepared a written complaint and approached the Senior Manager and also explained the facts that has taken place at the auction hall  who assured to take appropriate action against the delinquent officials.  The complainant has also sent a detailed complaint before the 1^st and 3^rd opposite parties.  The 4^th opposite party has sent a reply dated 25.05.2016 stating false and frivolous things that when the complainant challenged the right of the 7^th opposite party to participate in the auction he has shown the proxy  and also told that the authorization is with the Manager.  It is also stated in the reply notice that the 7^th opposite party has paid 68^th subscription on 28.05.2016 at the Kampisseri Branch and on 25.06.15 the amount was received by the Karunagapply Branch.  The reply notice itself would indicate that the 4^th opposite party has indulged in conspiracy with the 6^th and 7^th opposite party and after conducting auction, obtained authorization and also stating that the authorization was entrusted to the  Manager and that fact was intimated to the complainant and the complainant has failed to meet the Manager and only contacted the additional Manager.  The complainant has been producing a CD showing what is stated in the 4^th opposite parties reply notice is incorrect and also indicating that the 4^th opposite  party has entered into conspiracy with the 6^th and 7^th opposite party.

3.Complainant was very much available at the 4^th opposite parties office from 2.50 pm on 24.05.2016 till 3.15 pm on that day and has also explained all the above facts to the 4^th opposite party who in turn has stated that there is no proper authorization and hence he will take appropriate action.  But later the 4^th opposite party colluded with 6 and 7^th opposite party and fabricated a document stating as consent deed and thereby forged document with a view to obtain unlawful gain to 6^th and 7^th opposite party.  In the reply notice stated 24.05.2016 sent by 4^th opposite party itself falsely stated that there were auction of 18 numbers of chitties and he was very much available at the auction hall and only one auction and draw of certain other chitties were conducted. Though the complainant availed an application under the RTI seeking information regarding the above aspects,  information was denied.  The 1^st opposite party has sent a reply dated 31.05.2016 to his notice stating that after getting report he will take appropriate action.  But the 3^rd opposite party has not sent any reply to the notice. In the auction that took place in respect of chitty No.48/10 of the Karunagapply main branch of the KSFE wherein the complainant who is a chital alone has participated.  But the auction was fixed in the name of the 7^th opposite party who was having no authorization to participate in the auction.  The 4^th opposite party has entered into a conspiracy with the 6^th and 7^th opposite party created false document and caused the 7^th opposite party to bid the above chitty in auction and thereby the opposite parties have failed to render necessary service to the complainant who is a bonafied consumer  of the opposite parties and also caused heavy financial loss to the complainant.  Hence the complaint.

4.The opposite party no.6&7 remain exparte.  Opposite party No.1&3 filed detailed version raising the following contention.  The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts.  There is no consumer dispute between the parties.  The complainant has no cause of action against the opposite parties.  The prayer in the complaint to set aside the auction of 68^th chitty of chitty No.45/10 dated 24.05.2016 is not at all legally sustainable as per the Act.  There is no provision to pass a declaratory relief as per the Act.  In the absence of any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties the complaint is liable to be dismissed.  On 24.05.2016 the auction proceedings were commenced exactly at 1 pm.  The complainant who is also a chittalan has signed the register kept by KSFE for this purpose.  Other subscribers were also present in the hall to participate in the auction of the chitty.  They have also signed in the minutes of the chitty.  The complainant and  the 7^th opposite party who is the authorized representative and proxy of the 6^th opposite party have put their signature in the Minutes Register.  The 7^th opposite party is the proxy and husband of the 6^th opposite party.  She had remitted her chitty installment on the same day at the Kambisseri branch of KSFE and accordingly 7^th opposite party has submitted his proxy to the Assistant Manager.  On the basis of  his authorized proxy he was allowed to take part in the auction.  During the auction proceedings the complainant many times tried to intercept 7^th opposite party and that was warned by the officers.  The auction was continued with Bid up to Rs.31,000/- and finally 7^th opposite party proposed Rs.31,100/-.   Being the highest bid amount, the auction was confirmed in the name of the 7^th opposite party in the presence of the complainant himself.  Thereafter both complainant and 7^th opposite party signed the auction proceedings register kept for this purpose and both of them went out.  After some time complainant came back and requested the 5^th opposite party to show the authorization form/proxy of the 6^th opposite party.  The complainant was informed that the proxy can be shown to another chittalan only with the permission of the Branch Manager and the same can be shown after the arrival of the branch manager who was not  in office at that time.  But the complainant without waiting for the branch manager and to see the proxy he met the Assistant Manager and left the office without any explanation. 

5.Subsequently the 4^th opposite party Senior Manager came to the office and the complainant has submitted a written complaint to him.  Upon receipt of said complaint the 4^th opposite party examined the records and convinced that no improper or illegal proceedings have taken place in the auction.  The complainant was informed accordingly.  He was also informed that the complainant is entitled to examine the records directly and convince the truth.   The complainant never requested the 4^th opposite party to show the proxy of the 7^th opposite party.  Either during the auction proceedings or on the conclusion of the auction proceedings the complainant has not raised any objection about the conduct and proceedings of the auction and he has put his signature in the minutes.  6^th opposite party has remitted 68^th chitty installment at the Kambisseri Branch KSFE on 24.05.2016 at 12.41 pm, is very well informed to the complainant.  The 6^th opposite party has remitted the chitty installment before the commencement of the auction proceedings and she had also authorized her husband  7^th opposite party by means of proxy to participate in the auction.  Since the 6^th opposite party chittalan has already given proxy, her husband can very well participate in the auction proceedings legally and properly.  Though the complainant was physically present in the auction proceedings, he did  not take any effective effort to bid the chitty in his name and on the other hand he tried to influence the 7^th opposite party for withdrawing from the auction.  The complainant has not participated in the subsequent auction conducted on 24.06.2016 by paying the installment, which  itself shows that the complainant is not really interested to get into the auction and bid the chitty in his name.  When his attempt to bid the chitty for a lesser sum is failed, he tried to harass and defame the opposite parties by filing vexatious complaint before this forum.  The complainant and his wife have availed personal loan from the KSFE.  There are no prompt repayment in the said loan account.  After committing arrears in the loan account the loan were closed.  Now the complainant is a chittalan in another chitty No.34/2008.  He has committed  default in the said chitty also.  After repeated requests and reminders he remitted the arrears on 24.04.2016.  The complainant has also committed default in the payment of chitty 45/2010.  The arrears were remitted only on the auction date 24.05.2016.  In this chitty he has remitted the entire arrears from 7 to 58 installments together and became a substituted subscriber.  Since he enrolled in this chitty in the place of a defaulter, the KSFE has lost about Rs.38,000/- and the complainant has gained that extent.  The complainant has not sustained any financial loss in the chitty.  He has not sustained any mental agony and damages.  He has filed this complaint on the basis of same mistaken statement of accounts and caused to file this complaint on experimental basis.  No sort of documentary evidence is produced by the complainant to substantiate his complaint.  The alleged CD produced by the complainant along with  the complaint cannot be accepted as per law.  It is against the principles of law of evidence.  The intention of the complainant is only to defame and harass KSFE.

          6.Opposite party No.2,4&5 jointly filed separate version raising the following additional contentions.  The auction was conducted at sharp 1 pm on that day as per rules.  The signature of the complainant was obtained well before commencing the auction.  The allegations that the auction was not started even at 1.15 pm is incorrect nor the complainant was questioned why auction has not been conducting in time.  As a part of the auction proceedings the signature of the persons who participated in the auction has been obtained in the minutes book.  The complainant and the 7^th opposite party who is the recognized agent of the 6^th  opposite party have also put their signature in the minutes.  Chittal No.71, 81 and 88 were given proxy.  But they were not allowed to participate in the auction as they were not seen paid chitty subscription of the month.  However the 7^th opposite party who is the husband of the 6^th opposite party convinced other opposite parties that he has paid chitty subscription at the Kambisseri branch of KSFE.  The 7^th opposite party has produced the consent deed before the branch manager at the morning and that fact was informed to the auction section and that is the reason why the 7^th opposite party was allowed to participate in the auction.  The branch manager was not available as he has gone to Clappana for taking valuation for KSFE Chinnakkada Branch and at about 2 pm the Manager returned.  During auction proceedings the complainant in violation of the rules has contacted and attempted to talk with the 7^th opposite party.  But the 5^th opposite party has caused to stop the same.  The complainant has bid in auction by reducing Rs.31,000/-.  But the 7^th opposite party reduce the amount to Rs.31,100/- and thereby the auction was fixed in favour of the 7^th opposite party.  The complainant and 7^th opposite party put their signature in the proceedings of auction has been narrated and thereafter returned.

7. However the complainant again came over at the office of the 5^th opposite party and demanded to show the authorization given by the 6^th opposite party in favour of the 7^th opposite party and thereupon the complainant was informed by the 5^thopposite party that he will show and convince the same after the auction proceedings in respect of other chitties is over.  Accordingly the 5^th opposite party caused to convince the same to the complainant.  Thereupon the complainant demanded to see the proxy of the 7^th opposite party.  But it was kept by the Branch Manager and hence it can be shown only with the permission of the branch manager.  But the complainant has not waited to see the proxy and returned from the office of the Assistant Manager.  Though the complainant has caused to sent complaint alleging grievances stated in the complaint, the said complainant was closed as the allegations appeared to be baseless.  On the same day at about 2.45 pm the complainant approached the 4^th opposite party and made a complaint.  But on enquiry it was found that nothing illegal or irregular has been happened during the auction and the complainant is entitled to verify the documents and convince the same.  At the time of auction or completing the auction proceedings the complainant has not raised any complaint and has also put his signature  in all records relating to the auction proceedings. 

8. The 6^th opposite party has paid the monthly subscription well in time and has also given authorization to the 7^th opposite party for take part in the auction.  The allegation of the complainant that the 4^th opposite party colluded with the 6^th and 7^th opposite party is false and baseless.  Even if the 6^th opposite party has not given any authorization to the 7^th opposite party he is entitled to take part in the auction on the strength of proxy.  The complainant has been participating in the auction of the chitty for the 1^st time.  Though the complainant was having ample opportunity to bid the auction in his favor.  He has attempted to influence the 7^th opposite party with a view to obtain unlawful gain.  The complainant has not paid the chitty subscription on 24.06.16 and not take part in the auction.  The complainant has been raising false and frivolous allegation against KSFE with a view to defame the said institution when his attempt  to bid the auction in his favour by influencing the 7^th opposite party failed.  The complainant has not sustained any loss.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  The complainant has filed the present complaint by raising false and frivolous facts and accounts.  The complainant is not entitled to get any relief.

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

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or any unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party No.1 to 5?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs sought for in the complaint?
3. Relief and costs.

10. Evidence on the side of the complainant consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Ext.P1 to P4 and MO1.  Evidence on the side of the opposite party consists of the oral evidence of DW1, Ext.D1,D2,D2(a), D3 to D5, D6 series and D7 documents.  Both sides have filed notes of argument.  Heard both sides.

Point No.1&2

          11. For avoiding repetition of discussion of materials these 2 points are considered together.  The following are the admitted facts in this case.  On 24.05.2016 at 1 pm the auction of chitty No.68 wherein the complainant was a chital was scheduled to be conducted.  The 5^th opposite party started auction by quoting Rs.4,75,000/-.  The 7^th opposite party arrived at the auction hall claiming that he is the husband of  Deepa who is also a chital of the said chitty and also entrusted the chitty pass book to the 5^th opposite party who in turn told the lady staff who is present in the auction hall with that 7^th opposite party is the husband of 6^th opposite party Deepa.  The said lady staff obtained the signature of the complainant as well as the 7^th opposite party in the register concerned.  Auction continued till the 7^th opposite party quoted 4,68,000/-.  During this time the complainant challenged the authority of 7^th opposite party to participate in the auction. The subscription for the month was paid by the 6^th opposite party at another branch just before the commencement of the auction and thereby complied with the direction on that behalf.  Though the complainant objected the 7^th opposite party in participating the auction the 5^th opposite party who was conducting auction concluded the auction for Rs.4,68,000/- quoted by the 7^th opposite party.  The 5^th opposite party has obtained the signature of the participant of the auction the complainant has also put his signature.  The specific grievance of the complainant is that the 6^th and 7^th opposite party who are wife and husband respectively colluded with 4^th opposite party created false document and caused the 7^th opposite party to participate and bid the above chitty in auction and therefore the opposite party failed to render necessary service to the complainant who is a bonafide consumer  of the opposite parties and also caused heavy financial loss to the complainant.

          12. It is true that PW1  who is none other than the complainant has deposed in terms of his case.  The definite contention of the opposite party No.1 to5 is that the auction proceedings were duly conducted at 1 p.mas scheduled.  The complainant who is a chittalan has also signed in the register kept by the KSFE  for this purpose.  Other subscribers were also present in the hall to participated in the auction of other chitties.  The complainant and the 7^th opposite party who is the proxy and husband of the 6^th opposite party were also signed on the minutes of the chitty.  The 6^th opposite party already paid chitty installment of said same month at Kambissery Branch  and 7^th opposite party has submitted his proxy to the Assistant Manager.  It is further contented that on the basis of the authorized proxy 7^th opposite party was allowed to take part in the auction. 

13. DW1 is none other than the Manager of the KSFE, Karunagappally branch were the alleged episode taken place.  He has deposed in terms of his contention.  DW1 further proves Ext.D1 proxy executed by the 6^th opposite party in favor of her husband Binulal (7^th op).  According to DW1 just before the commencement of the auction proceedings the 7^th opposite party  Binulal who already submitted the proxy to the Branch Manager came to auction hall and informed that 68^th chitty installment is remitted at the Kambissery Branch as his wife Deepa is working as teacher in a school at Kambissery near KSFE branch.  Immediately the staff of the opposite parties confirmed the same by means  of telephonic contact with Kambissery Branch and confirmed that she has remitted 68^thinstallment at 12.41 pm at 24.05.2016.  Ext.D6 series original receipt and cash scroll statement would well establish the above fact.  In the circumstance the 7^th  opposite party Binulal was permitted to take part in the auction proceedings and signed on the auction  proceedings register.  The biding started at Rs.26,000/- and continued to Rs.31000/- and finally the 7^th opposite party bid the chitty in auction for Rs.31100/- since there was no counter offer from the complainant for enhanced bid amount.  In the circumstance chitty was confirmed in the name of the 6^th opposite party Smt.Deepa.  It is also brought out in evidence through DW1 that upon the conclusion of the auction proceedings both complainant and 7^th opposite party who is the proxy holder signed on the auction proceedings register.  An attested copy of relevant page of the register is marked as Ext.D2.  it is also clear from the evidence of DW1 that both the complainant and the 7^th opposite party have also signed on the minutes of the chitty proceedings which is clear from Ext.D3 attested copy of  the minutes of the proceedings dated 24.05.2016.  In view of  Ext.D1 to D3 document it is cristal clear that  the entire chitty auction proceedings were done in a transparent manner and the complainant was physically  present and participated in the bid. 

14. The learned counsel for the opposite parties has argued that if at all the complainant was having any grievance or objection against the conduct and conclusion of chitty auction proceedings he would not signed the chitty auction proceeding register and after signing D2&D3 registers the complainant is having no locus standi  to raise the complaint.  In view of the facts and circumstances   discussed above we find much force in the above argument. 

15. The oral evidence of DW1 coupled with copy of Ext.D5  minutes of  87^th auction proceedings would indicate that the complainant has take part  in the 87^th auction proceedings held on 26.12.2017 and the chitty was confirmed in his name for a net amount of Rs.4,76,980/-.    As the complainant has obtained Rs.4,74,950/- instead of Rs.4,69,000/- and thereby he has been benefited and has not sustained any loss as contented by the opposite party. 

16. The main grievance of the complainant is that the proxy alleged to have been given by 6^th opposite party in favor of 7^th opposite party to participate in the auction proceedings of the chitty has not been shown to the complainant though he doubted the existence of such a proxy.  According to the complainant he made a request to the Branch Manager to show the proxy given by the 6^th opposite party at that time but, instead of showing the  same the branch manager assured that action will be taken against the officers concerned.  The opposite party has denied the above case of the complainant but there is no material except ipsy dixit of the complainant to show that the branch manager assured that action will be taken against officers concerned.  In the light of Ext.D1 to D5 documents we find no merit in the above contention of the opposite party. In this connection it is to be pointed out that in view of the body part of  Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act that the court is entitled to presume that the proxy was produced by the 7^thopposite party and it was accepted by the branch manager well before starting auction and then only he had given instruction to the staff concerned to conduct auction.  It is also clear from the available materials that the 7^th opposite party has declared that he has already produced the proxy before the branch manager.  In such circumstance there is no chance of assuring that he will take action against the employees as claimed by the complainant. 

17. Another allegation in the complainant is that after he made oral protest to the officials of the branch their conversations were recorded in MO1 CD and the same has also been  produced before this Forum/Commission.  A copy of MO1 CD is given to the opposite side also.  But according to the  learned counsel  for the opposite parties MO1 CD is not audible that the complainant has not produced any data or sound.  The recording  form or device is not produced before this Forum/ Commission.  No authentication or endorsement by a competent authority is also produce to convince that the said CD contains the alleged conversation between the complainant and the Manager of the KSFE especially when DW1 categorically denied the content of the CD and the alleged conversation.  It is true that the complainant has produced Ext.P2  copy of alleged Advocate notice.  But no postal receipt or acknowledgement card has been produced to prove  the  sending and receipt of such a notice. 

18. It is true that the complainant has filed a petition as IA.235 praying to direct the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite party and also the then Assistant Manager working at KSFE, Karunagappally branch on 24.05.2016 to supply sample voice  inorder to forward the same to the Forensic Science laboratory along with MO1 CD.  The present case (CC.150/16) is one of the oldest case pending on the file of this commission.  Recording of evidence in this case was already over as early on 03.09.2019.  After filing notes of argument and hearing the argument of the learned counsel for the opposite parties wisdom was drawn and filed the above petition along with 2 other IAs which were dismissed after hearing both sides on the following grounds.  There is no enabling provision in the old Consumer Protection Act of 1986 or in the new Act 2019 enabling the complainant to file such a petition seeking to forward  voice track in MO1 CD sample voice of opposite parties No.2&3 and the then Assistant Manager.  The old as well as new Act envisages only summary proceedings.  Section 13(1)(c) of the old Act or 38(1)(c) of the new Act is not applicable to the present petition.  The request of the complainant is not to test the goods or services to find out the defects in the good or service to attract Section 13(1)(c) of the old Act or Section 38(1)(c).  A plain reading of Section 13(1)(c) would indicate that sample of defective goods is to be forwarded to the laboratory to find out the defects if any  in the goods at the initial stage before starting the trial and not at the fag end of the trial that too after starting the argument.  A detailed procedure in recording evidence or collecting scientific evidence at the fag end of the proceedings  is not warranted especially when the Forum has to conduct the proceedings in a summary way.  It  is highly unjust on the part of the Forum/commission to issue directions to the opposite parties  to appear before the Forum/Commission and gave their voice for subjecting it for analysis in scientific laboratory since it is highly unfair to insist the opposite parties to give evidence in support  of the complainant.  No equipment or implements  are available at this commission to record the sound of anybody. In the circumstances  we have dismissed the said IA and the evidence re-opening petition. 

19.Ext.D7 is admittedly the chitty agreement.  In clause No.12 of Ext.D7 document it is clearly stated that a chittalan is entitled to appoint an agent by giving proxy for the purpose of taking part in the auction and in such event the proxy is conferred with all the rights of chittalan whose proxy he is holding and he is entitled to take part in the chitty auction and also sign on the documents and the original chittalan is liable for the said act of the proxy.  It is further to be pointed out that in clause No.18(a) of the chitty agreement a chittalan is entitled to pay the monthly subscription through other branch of the KSFE before participating in the auction.  It is clear from Ext.D7 chitty agreement that there is provision for appointing a proxy and also paying chitty subscription any of the branches of KSFE before starting the auction.  In the circumstances we are of the view that the opposite party No.1 to 5 have not committed any unfair trade practice and there is also no deficiency in service on their part in  respect of the chitty auction conducted on 24.05.2016 at 1 pm. 

20. One of the main reliefs sought for in the complaint is to set aside the auction of 68^th chitty of chitty No.45/10 dated 25.04.2016.  But the provisions under section 14(a) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 would not empower the forum to set aside the proceeding of a statutory body like KSFE and to pass such a declaratory order.

On evaluating the entire materials available on record we find no merit in the complaint and the same is only to be dismissed.  The points answered accordingly.

Point No.3

In the result the complaint stands dismissed.  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   27^th  day of  April    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                :C.S.Anilkumar

Documents marked for the  complainant

Ext.P1             : Chitty passbook

Ext.P2             :Copy of Advocate notice

Ext.P3             : Reply notice

Ext.P4 &MOI :CDs

Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-

DW1               :Muhammed  Shereef

Documents marked for opposite party:-

Ext.D1            : Proxy

Ext.D2            :  Photocopy of register of auction proceedings dated 24.05.2016

Ext.D2(a)       : Auction proceeding register

Ext.D3            :  Photocopy of minutes of proceedings dated 24.05.2016

Ext.D4            :Photocopy of register of auction proceedings dated 26.12.2017.

Ext.D5            :Photocopy of minutes of auction proceedings dated 26.12.2017.

Ext.D6 series : Original receipt dated 24.05.2016 and photocopy of cash scroll.

Ext.D7            :Chitty agreement.

E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-

S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-

          Stanly Harold:Sd/-

          Forwarded/by Order

                                                                                  Senior Superintendent