BEFORE THE CIRCUIT BENCH A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: AT VISAKHAPATNAM
OF 2008 AGAINST C.C.NO.603 OF 2003 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM-I VISAKHAPATNAM
Between
Sri D.V.Satyanarayana S/o late Subbanna
aged 60 years, R/o D.No.40-59-49,
Sanjeevayya Colony, Waltair R.S.
Visakhapatnam
Appellant/complainant
A N D
1. The Managing Director
Sri Rampriya Chit Fund (P) Ltd.,
Regd. Off: Swarnalok Complex
Governorpet, Vijayawada-2
2. The Branch Manager,
Sri Rampriya Chit Fund (P) Ltd.,
Bheemavaram, W.G. Dist.
3. The Branch Manager
Sri Rampriya Chit Fund (P) Ltd.,
situated at 28-2-54, II Floor
Jagadamba Centre, Visakhapatnam
Respondent/opposite parties
Counsel for the Appellant Sri Ch.R.Vasantha Kumar
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 Sri G.Krishna Prasad
F.A.No. 1468 OF 2008 AGAINST C.C.NO.603 OF 2003
Between
1. Sri Rampriya Chit Fund (P) Ltd.,
Swarnalok Complex
Governorpet, Vijayawada-2
rep. by its Managing Director
2. The Branch Manager,
Sri Rampriya Chit Fund (P) Ltd.,
Bheemavaram, W.G. Dist.
3. The Branch Manager
Sri Rampriya Chit Fund (P) Ltd.,
situated at 28-2-54, II Floor
Jagadamba Centre, Visakhapatnam
(opposite parties no.2 and 3 shown are no more
in existence since those two branches were already closed)
Appellant/opposite party
A N D
D.V.Satyanarayana S/o late Subbanna
Aged about 45 years, R/o H.No.40-59-49
Sanjeevayya Colony, Near Waltair Railway
Station, Visakhapatnam
Respondent/complainant
Counsel for the Appellant Sri G.Krishna Prasad
Counsel for the Respondent Sri Ch.R.Vasanth Kumar
QUORUM: SRI SYED ABDULLAH, HON’BLE MEMBER
&
SRI R.LAKSHMINARSIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER
THURSDAY THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND TEN
Oral Order ( As per R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member)
***
These two appeals arise out of the order passed by the District Forum-I, Visakhapatnam in C.C.No.603 of 2003 whereof the appellant in F.A.No.1468 of 2008 is the opposite party and the appellant in F.A.No.1219 of 2008 is the complainant before the District forum.
F.A.No.1469 of 2008 is taken as the lead case wherein the facts as represented by the parties are that the 1st opposite party is a company registered under the Companies Act, dealing in Chit Fund Business and the opposite parties no.2 and 3 are the branch offices of opposite party no.1. The complainant joined as a member in the chit group namely 1) RVL D3 B/7 for a sum of Rs.2 lakhs and 2) RVL F3 B/32 for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs. The complainant became a successful bidder in the auction held by the opposite party no.2 in respect the chit RVL D3 B/7 and he agreed to forego an amount of Rs.65,000/-. The complainant is entitled to receive Rs.1,35,000/- which was not paid to the complainant in spite of producing sufficient sureties to the opposite party no.2.
The opposite party no.2 adjusted the amount of Rs.1,35,000/- to the credit of the chit RVL F B/32 of Rs.5 lakhs. The opposite party no.2 neither informed nor issued any certificate to the complainant. The chit bearing No.RVL F3 B/32 is still in force. The complainant remitted installments through the opposite party no.3. In spite of legal notice got issued by the complainant the opposite parties did not pay the amount. Hence, the complaint sought direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,35,000/- pertaining to Chit Series RVL D3 B/7 and to return the sum of Rs.74,109/- being the subscription of the complainant towards the chit RVL F3 B/32 with interest, dividends, compensation and costs.
The opposite parties filed counter admitting that the complainant was subscriber of chits of value Rs.2 lakh and Rs.5 lakh but they both pertain to the branch of the opposite party no.1 situated at Bhimavaram in W.G. District. The complainant is also subscriber of another chit RSV1V/04, chti value of Rs.1,00,000/- relating to the opposite party no.3 at Visakhapatnam. The complainant also stood as guarantor in two more chits i.e., for one Smt Y.Viajaya Durga in Chit No.RVLC7-B/04 and for one Smt Hanumanthu Satyanarayanamma in Chit No.RVLF2-B/08 and both the chits relate to the opposite party no.2 at Bhimavaram. By the time of payment of prize amount of Rs.1,35,000/- to the complainant, complainant was in arrears of subscriptions of all his three chits i.e., two chits at the opposite party no.2 branch and one chit at opposite party no.1 branch.
As per condition 17(d) of the chit agreement, the Foreman has right to adjust such amount towards his liabilities without prior notice; only the balance, if any, will be paid to the subscribers. The complainant after becoming successful bidder in Chit RVLD3B/07 for Rs.2,00,000/- having agreed to forego Rs.65,000/- requested the opposite party no.2 to adjust the amount of Rs.1,35,000/- towards the due in the chit RVLF2B/08 belonging to Smt H.Satyanarayana and Chit No.RVLF2B/04 belonging to Smt Y.Viajaya Durga. Accoardingly, Rs.38,000/-, Rs.14,900/- and Rs.14,199/- is adjusted to Chit Nos.RVLF2B/08, RSC1V/04 and RVKLC-B/04 respectively. The balance amount was requested to be adjusted towards subsequent installments in Chit Nos. RVLD3B7 and RSC1V/04. There is a suit pending in the civil court at Bhimavaram wherein the complainant is one of the parties as he stood as guarantor to Smt Y.Vijaya Durga against whom the said suit is filed. The complainant is guilty for suppression of material facts. There is no deficiency of service on their part.
The complainant has filed his affidavit and the documents, Exs.A1 to A6. The opposite party had not chosen to file any document.
The District Forum has allowed the complaint with a direction for payment of a sum of Rs.1,35,000/- payable under chit no.RVLD3B/7 and an amount of Rs.70,404/- payable under another chit besides an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and costs.
Feeling aggrieved by the order of the District Forum the opposite party no.1 filed appeal contending that in view of terms and conditions of the agreement it was entitled to appropriate the prize money towards dues in other chits where the complainant fell in arrears and also in other chits where the complainant stood as the guarantor to the subscribers who received the prize amount and failed to pay the installments. The District Forum has not given opportunity to the opposite party for marking the documents.
Feeling dissatisfied with the order of the District Forum the complainant has preferred the appeal contending that the District Forum had not awarded interest for the delay caused in payment of the chit amount and the District Forum failed to consider the mental agony and financial hardship caused due to the deficiency in service.
The points for consideration are :
1) Whether the opposite parties are entitled to appropriate the prize amount due to the complainant towards the dues in other chits?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the interest for hardship and financial loss?
3) To what relief?
POINTS NO.1 AND 2 The complainant was the subscriber of chit no.RVLD3B/07 for the chit value of Rs.2,00,000/- and the chit no.RVLF3B/32 for the chit value of Rs.5,00,000/-. The complainant became successful bidder in chit no.in RVLD3B/07 and he has agreed to forego Rs.65,000./-. The learned counsel for the opposite party no.1 had contended that the complainant requested the opposite parties to adjust the prize amount of Rs.1,35,000/- towards the due in the chits, RVLF2B/08 belonging to Smt H.Satyanarayanamma, Chit No.RVLF2B/04 belonging to Y.Vijayadurga and the chit No.RSC1V/04 belonging to him. The complainant stood as the guarantor for the first mentioned two chits. The complainant denied that he stood as guarantor of Satyanarayanamma and Vijaya Durga. The opposite party no.2 has filed suit O.S.No.479 of 2005 on the file of Jr.Civil Judge, Bhimavaram against the complainant and 3 others for recovery of Rs.58,086/-. The opposite party no.3 has filed the suit O.S.No.1187 of 2003 on the file of Jr.Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam against Dandu Vani Kumari and three others. It is not explained how the suit O.S.No.1187 of 2003 is relevant to the facts of this case as the complainant is not made a party to the suit.
The complainant though denied that he ever stood guarantor for Satyanarayanamma and Vijayadurga, he has stated in his affidavit that the opposite party no.1 has to collect the amount due from the subscribers in the chits concerned but not from him. He has stated in his affidavit as under:
“There is no proper evidence to state that I stood as guarantor for some other person. I am an innocent person and the opposite parties unnecessarily troubled me and created, fabricated to gain unlawful in this chit transaction. I further submit hat the company has to collect the amount from the original persons, who are the defaulters in the chit series”
The statement of the complainant coupled with the contention of the opposite party that the complainant had stood as guarantors for Satyanarayanamma and Vijaya Durga leads us to the conclusion that the complainant was a guarantor insofar as the chits bearing NO. RVLD3B7 and RSC1V/04. Once, we come to the conclusion that the complainant had stood as sureties for Satyanarayanamma and Vijayadurga, the dispute relating to the authority of the opposite party no.1in appropriating the prize amount of rs.1,35,000/- due to the complainant towards the dues in chits belonging to Satyanarayanamma and Vijayadurga would come into the picture. The opposite party no.1 relies upon conditions No.9 and 17(d) of the Chit Agreement. Condition No.9 deals with the lien of the foreman over the amounts pertaining to the guarantors. Condition No.9 of the Agreement reads as under:
So long as any money remains owing under this guarantee, the company shall have a lien in all amounts standing to the credit of the guarantors with the company”
Condition No.17(d) reads as follows:
“Lien over the amounts: If the chit subscribers are indebited to the foreman for any amounts either personally or as surety, the foreman will have in respect of such liabilities first charge over any amount that may be to them from the foreman and other assets lying with the foreman. The foreman has right to adjust such amounts towards his liabilities without prior notice. Only the balance, if any, will be paid to the subscribers.”
The chit agreement which is the basis of the claim of the complainant, has empowered the opposite party no.1 to exercise lien over the amounts due to the complainant. In addition to these documents, the complainant has filed a copy of letter addressed to the Registrar of Chits stating that he has received the amount of Rs.1,35,000/- towards prize money in chit No.RVLD3B-7. it is not known whether the prized subscribers for whom the complainant stood as guarantor committed any default and fell in arrears. However, in view of the power conferred on the opposite party no.1 by virtue of conditions No.9 and 17(d) of the Chit Agreement, it can be inferred that in view of the default committed by the prized subscribers for whom the complainant stood as sureties, the opposite party no.1 exercised their right conferred on them by the chit agreement and adjusted the amount of Rs.1,35,000/- i.e., the prize amount towards the dues, Rs.38,000/- was adjusted in the chit RVLF2B/08, an amount of Rs.14,900/- was adjusted to the chit RSC1/04 and the balance amount of Rs.14,199/- was adjusted to the chit No.RVLC7-B/04 and the balance amount to the chit RVLD3B/7. Thus, Rs.40,131/- was adjusted to his chit RVLD3B/7 and Rs.27,770/- was adjusted to his chit RSV1/04.
The opposite party no.1 states that the complainant has the knowledge of aforementioned adjustments and for that reason he kept quite for one year without making any demand for the prize amount. A perusal of the legal notice got issued by the complainant shows that it was issued in the month of March 2003. The complainant has not come forward with any reason for keeping quite and not making any demand for the prize amount of Rs.1,35,000/-. This attitude of the complainant supports the contention of the opposite party no.1 that he had authorized the opposite party no.1 to adjust the prize amount towards the dues belonging to the chits of Satyanarayanamma and Vijayadurga besides the dues pertaining to his two chits.
The complainant has stated that he had paid the entire instalments in the chit of which the value was Rs.5 lakh with the opposite party no.2. Accaording to the complainant, he had paid an amount of Rs.74,109/- in 14 instalments. The total number of instalments of the chit is 50. The opposite party no.2 had admitted that it had adjusted the amount of Rs.3,493/- to the credit of 14th instalment. It is the contention of the oppose party that the name of the complainant was removed from the chit under due intimation. The complainant has not disputed the fact. In these circumstances, the complainant is entitled to amount of Rs.74,109/-. However, the opposite party had not paid the amount on the ground that the chit was still in force till the month of February 2004. Even after the month of February 2004, it appears the opposite parties have not paid the amount which the complainant legally entitled to claim. This lapse on the part of the opposite parties would constitute deficiency in service.
The opposite party no.1 has stated that the opposite parties no.2 and 3 are no longer in existence and they have been closed at their respective places. In that event, the opposite party no.1 has to explain as to what happened to the suits filed on behalf of the opposite parties no.2 and 3. There is no explanation so far in this regard from the opposite party no.1. The opposite party no.1 is entitled to deduct and appropriate 5% of the chit value Rs.25,000/- towards the foreman commission. The suit filed by the opposite party no.2 was stated to have been dismissed and it is not known whether the suit was restored to its original number. Taking into consideration of all these circumstances, we are inclined hold the complainant is entitled to the amount of Rs.49,109/- which is the balance amount after deducting the amount of Rs.25,000/- towards the foreman commission from the total amount of Rs.74,109/-. The complainant is also entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of completion of the chit i.e., 1.2.2004.
In the result F.A.No.1468 of 2008 is allowed. The order of the District Forum is modified. The opposite parties no.1 to 3 directed to pay an amount of Rs.49,109/- with interest @ 9% per annum from 1.2.2004 till payment. F.A.No.1219 of 2008 is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
MEMBER
MEMBER
Dt.29.07.2010
KMK
