FA 1326/2008 against CC 30/2008 on the file of the District Forum, Ranga Reddy District

Between :

Kolli Anjaneyulu, S/o Venkat Rao,

Aged about 32 years, Occ : Business

R/o D. No. 58-530/1, Patamata,

Vijayawada – 520 021                           .. Appellant/complainant

And

1. M/s. Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd

Rep. by its Managing Director, Regd. Office

At 5-23/1, 2^nd floor, Bagh Ameer, Kukatpalli,

Hyderabad.

2. Managing Director,

M/s. Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd

At 5-23/1, 2^nd floor, Bagh Ameer, Kukatpalli,

Hyderabad.

3. The zonal Manager,

M/s. Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd

Rep. by its Managing Director,

Zonal  Office at 5-23/1, 1^st  floor, Bagh Ameer, Kukatpalli,

Hyderabad.

4. The Branch Manager

Branch office at Hubsiguda,

M/s. kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd

Office at 4-44/4, St. No.8, Opp: Habsiguda,

Hyderabad.                                                    .. Respondents/OPs            

Counsel for the appellant           :           M/s. M. Haribabu.

Counsel for the Respondents    :           Mr. N. Amarnath

CORAM    :   

SRI SYED ABDULLAH                  ..             HON’BLE MEMBER

AND

 SRI R. LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO         .. HON’BLE MEMBER

Tuesday, the Third Day of August, Two Thousand Ten

Oral order :   ( as per Sri Syed Abdullah, Hon’ble Member )

                                                                                                                                    ********

The unsuccessful complainant in CC 30/2008 before the District Forum, Ranga Reddy District  filed this appeal questioning the legality and propriety  of the order in  dismissing the complaint filed or recovery of the Chit fund subscriptions paid to the opposite parties.

 The facts of the case  are  that the opposite party is a company registered under the Companies Act and running chit und business in the name of the M/s. Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd, the 2^nd opposite party is the Managing Director, 3^rd and 4^th opposite parties are Zonal and Branch Managers of the Chit fund company.   That one  Kastala Mohan Rao joined as a Member of the Chit series bearing No.  HKT 01J  for a chit value of Rs. 5 lakhs.  The said member paid 13 instalments @ Rs.10,000/- per month without default. He continued the chit.  So  on 05.09.2005 he along with the complainant  approached the 4^th opposite party  for getting the chit transferred  in the name of the complainant.  4^th opposite party had agreed and obtained  signatures on chit transfer form and other documents by transferring the chit  in the name of the complainant.  The complainant had paid Rs.91,500/- to the said Mohan Rao. 4^th opposite party received 14^th instalment of the chit i.e., Rs.6,500/-  by way of cheque  and issued pass book entering all the payments in the pass book.  That on 25.10.2005, the Asst. Manager of the 4^th opposite party went to Nandigama  and collected another sum of Rs.6,500/-  by way of cheque towards 15^th instalment and issued a receipt for it and also made an entry in the pass book on 1.12.2005.  The complainant approached the fourth opposite party  for payment of 16^th instalment but the office staff refused to receive  the payment stating that the chit was not transferred in his name and that the payment has to be made only in the name of Sri K. Mohan Ro.  That on 3.12.2005 the complainant  has addressed  a letter to the Executive Director of Opposite party no.1, so also, a registered letter to the 4^th opposite party enclosing a cheque for Rs.65,00/-  but the same was returned  without giving any reasons.  Again another registered letter enclosing a cheque for Rs.13,530/- was sent pertaining to16th and 17^th instalments which was  also returned.  A legal notice dated 24.04.2006 was addressed to the opposite parties  demanding to receive  the instalments due.   Even after receiving  the legal notice there was no response.  The act or omission on the part of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.1,04,500/- with interest and also compensation of Rs.50,000/- and costs.

The fourth opposite party filed its version  and it was adopted by Opposite parties 1 to 3.  The allegations made in the complaint are denied.  It is stated that one K. Mohan Rao became a Member of the chit in question but  it is denied that the complainant and the said Member approached  the first opposite party  requesting for transfer of chit in favour of the complainant which was duly transferred by issuing a pass book, so also,  payment of instalments made by the complainant.  It is further stated that  that original subscriber Mohan Rao was defaulter. So the company filed Civil Suit  for recovery of Rs.65,551/-  before the Principal, Jr. Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District  which is pending.  The Khammam branch also filed  a suit in respect of another cit in respect of K. Mohan Rao for recovery for Rs..27,147/-.  The fourth opposite party got a lien over the rights in respect of non priced chit amounts  of K. Mohan Rao.   Hence prayed to dismiss the claim.

During enquiry, the complainant filed documents Ex.A-1 to A-14 but evidence affidavit was not filed. The opposite parties have filed Ex. B-1 to B-7 along with evidence affidavit.

After going through the evidence on record, the District Forum held that the complainant had not filed either his affidavit evidence or  that of K. Mohan Rao to prove that he paid Rs.91,500/-. So it cannot be accepted  that a sum of Rs.91,500/- got  transferred in his name and thereby dismissed the complaint holding that there was no deficiency in service.

Point for consideration is, whether the impugned order suffers from any factual and legal infirmity for its interference ?

No doubt the complainant had not filed the evidence affidavit but he has filed his verified affidavit at the time of filing of the complaint  and he mentioned all the list of documents which are relied to establish his case.  Ex. B-1 to B-5 relates to the chit agreement executed by K. Mohan Rao and copy of the accounts statement pertaining to the chit in question.

It is a common practice  and also permissible under bye-laws that whenever a  Member of the chit unable to continue the chit the same may be transferred in the name of others.   It is the  looked out of the transferor and transferee to agree to receive the payments that were to be paid.  When once the opposite party had issued Ex. A-1 pass book in the name of the complainant acknowledging payments  right from 25.09.2004 till 25.10.2005 it is for them to explain.   This aspect was not at all been  taken into consideration or discussed by the District Forum. So also, with regad to Ex. A-3 printed receipt signed by the opposite parties staff  acknowledging payment of Rs.6,500/- on 25.10.2005 pertaining to the chit AKTOIJ-10  issued  in the name of the complainant himself. Further the complainant had issued Ex. A-4 registered notice  to the Company’s Executive Director and thereafter he sent Ex. A6 and A7 letters to the opposite parties enclosing cheques for Rs.6,500/-  and another for Rs.13,530/-  covering two instalments but the said letter was returned by the opposite parties.  Again Ex. A-12 registered notice  was sent by the complainant through registered pos but there was no response at all. . The documents Ex. B-1 to B7 filed are of no help to resist the claim of the complainant when the opposite parties have issued pass book acknowledging  the payments in it.  Equity and justice requires  that the complainant is to be refunded  the amount to the extent that was paid. The District Forum has not at all discussed about these documents filed by the complainant.  In the absence of any documentary proof that the complainant had paid Rs.91,500/-  to Sri K. Mohan Rao he cannot claim for that amount. However, the complainant is entitled for the amount covered by Ex. A-1 and A3.  Of course, the amount of Rs.6,500/- covered by E. A- 3 is shown in Ex. A1 pass book. The total amount covered by the payments in Ex. A-1 comes to Rs.1,50,000/- inclusive of dividends but the complainant has claimed only Rs.1,04,500/- with interest thereon and also compensation. The appellant/complainant is entitled to the amount of Rs.1,04,500/- with interest there on  from respective dates of payment till realization.  He is not entitled for any additional compensation.

The complainant is entitled for the amount of Rs.6,500/- for 13 months, besides two payments of Rs.10,000/- from 25.09.2004 up to 25.10.2005 which comes to Rs.1,04,500/- but the complainant has restricted the amount to Rs.1,04,500/-  without claiming dividends on it.  Therefore, the order of the District Forum is not sustainable and is liable to be dismissed.

 In the result, the appeal is allowed directing the opposite parties 1 to 4 with joint and several liability directing to pay a sum of Rs.1,04,500/- with interest at 9% pa from the respective dates of payment till realization  and costs through out at Rs.2,000/- within four weeks from the date of the receipt of the order.

                                                                                                                                                                        SD/-MEMBER

                                                                                                                                                                        SD/- MEMBER

                                                                                                                                                                        DT:03.08.2010.