Present:  1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President.

                                         2. Smt. Sheena.V.V., Member.

                                         3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member

                                     30^th  day of  November 2017

CC.763/06, CC.764/06, CC.765/06, CC.766/06, CC.767/06, CC.768/06, CC.770/06, CC.771/06, CC.803/06, CC.804/06, CC.805/06, CC.806/06, CC.807/06, CC.808/06, CC.809/06, CC.810/06, CC.811/06, CC.812/06, CC.837/06, CC.838/06, CC.839/06, CC.840/06, CC.868/06, CC.869/06, CC.870/06, CC.871/06, CC.904/06, CC.905/06, CC.1173/06, CC.1174/06, CC.1175/06, CC.1177/06, CC.1178/06, CC.1179/06, CC.1180/06, CC.1181/06, CC.1182/06.                       

                                    COMMON     O R D E R

By  Sri.P.K,.Sasi, President

                                    CC.763/06 filed on 3/10/06

Complainant                :           Shahanas Sidique, W/o.Sidique, Kunjakkan H,

                                                P.O.Eriyad, Kodungallur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

Opposite Parties          :           1. M/s.Cochin Bearing Centre PB No.4206,    

                                                    Judges Avenue, P.O.Kaloor, Kochi, rep. by 

                                                    Managing  Partner, Muhammed Salim,

                                                   S/o.Punnilath Moideen Bava.

                                                2. P.M.Muhammed Salim, S/o.Punnilath

                                                    Moideen Bava, Managing Partner, Cochin

                                                    Bearing Centre, 35/2509 Bhagyatara Road,

                                                    Punnilath House, Near Abad Flat,

                                                    Karukapilly Junction, Edappilly North

                                                    Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam.

                                                3. A.A.Rahim, S/o/Abdul Khadar, Partner,

                                                    Cochin Bearing Centre, Andiyakath House,

                                                    Kaipamangalam.P.O., Kodungallur Taluk,

                                                    Thrissur.

                                                4. N.A.Abdul Rahim, S/o.Njarakattil Abdul

                                                    Khadar, Partner, Cochin Bearing Centre,

                                                    Kaipamangalam Village, P.O.Perinjanam,

                                                    Thrissur.

                                                5. K.K.Aboobakker, S/o.Kochunni, Partner,

                                                    Cochin Bearing Centre, Karukapadath

                                                    Vediyil, Near  Cochin Public School,

                                                    P.O.Thrikkakara, Vazhakala Village,

                                                    Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam.

                                                6. P.M.Muhammed, S/o.P.K.Moideen Bava,

                                                    Partner,  Cochin Bearing Centre,

                                                    B.T.S.Avenue Road, Near Keerthi Nagar,

                                                    B.T.S.Road, Elamakkara.P.O., Edappilly

                                                    North Village, Kanayannur Taluk,

                                                   Ernakulam.

                                             7.  P.M.Muhammed Sanil, S/o.Punnilath

                                                   Muhammed Salim, Partner, Cochin Bearing

                                                   Centre, Bhagyatara Road, Punnilath House,

                                                   Near Abad Flat, Karukapilly Junction,

                                                   Edappilly North Village, Kanayannur Taluk,

                                                   Ernakulam.

                                                8.P.M.Harris, S/o.Punnilath  Muhammed,

                                                   Partner,  Cochin Bearing Centre,

                                                   B.T.S.Avenue Road, Near Keerthi Nagar,

                                                   B.T.S.Road, Elamakkara.P.O., Edappilly

                                                   North Village, Kanayannur Taluk,

                                                   Ernakulam.

                                                ( Adv.John Numpeli(Junior), Kochi for

                                                OP1, OP2 & OP7)

                                                ( Adv.P.J.Jobi, Irinjalakuda for OP3&OP4)

                                                (Adv.M.Sathyanadhan, Thrissur for

                                                OP5, OP6 & OP8)

                                                            …..

            The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.40,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 1/8/1998.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 12% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                        CC.764/06 filed on 3/10/06

Complainant :  Sadique, S/o.Muhammadunni, Ayyaril House, P.O.Eriyad, Thrissur.

                        (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                ….

            2.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 2/4/04.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.765/06 filed on 3/10/06

Complainant    :                       Shahul Hameed, S/o.Bava, Kannamkulath

                                                House, P.O.Pathazhakkadu, Thrissur.,

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            3.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.75,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 5/6/1999.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.766/06 filed on 3/10/06

Complainant    :                       Shameeda Sadique, W/o.Sadique, Ayyaril

                                                House, Thuruthichal, P.O.Eriyad, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            4.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 4/12/1997.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.767/06 filed on 3/10/06

Complainant    :                       Ameena Latheef, W/o.Abdul Latheef,

                                                Pulikkalakath House, P.O.P-Vemballur,

                                                Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            5.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.4,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 1/8/05.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.768/06 filed on 3/10/06

Complainant    :                       Khadeejabee Saithu, W/o.Saithu, Punnilath

                                                House, P.O.Vemballur, Kodungallur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

              6.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.65,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 6/10/2000.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.770/06  filed on 3/10/06

Complainant    :           Shahul Hameed, S/o.Bava, Kannamkulath

                                    House, P.O.Pathazhakad, Thrissur.

                                    (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            7.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.1,50,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 1/4/2004 .  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.771/06 filed on 3/10/06

Complainant    :                       Hamsa, S/o.Abdulla, Mey Fair, Kodungallur

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

              8.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.2,00,,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 1/6/2005 .  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.803/06 filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Raheema Rahman, D/o.Rahman,

                                                Njaveliparambil House, Narayanamangalam,

                                                P.O.Pulloot,(N), Kodungllur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            9.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.75,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 3/9/2003 .  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.804/06 filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Saithu.P.B @ Saithumuhammed, Punnilath

                                                House, P.O. P-Vemballur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …

            10.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.80,000/-with the 1^st opposite party company on 8/4/1995 .  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.805/06  filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Rahmath, W/o.Rafeek Rahman,

                                                Njaveliparambil House,

                                                P.O.Narayanamangalam, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

              11.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,60,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 3/6/1997 .  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.806/06  filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Saithu.P.B @ P.B.Saithumuhammed, Punnilath

                                                House, P.O. Vemballur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            12.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.70,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 8/4/95.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.807/06  filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Ummukulsu, W/o.Abdul Rahiman,

                                                Karukapadathputhen Veedu, P.O.Eriyad,

                                                Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv/P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            13.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 12/7/2004.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.808/06  filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Muhammed Salih, S/o.Saithu Muhammed,

                                                Punnilath House, P.O.Vembalur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            14.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.3,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 4/11/2000.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                C.809/06  filed on16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Bini, D/o.Ibrahim, Vediyil House, P.O.Pulloot,

                                                Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

              15.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 7/9/2005.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.810/06 filed on16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Sini, D/o.Ibrahim, Vediyil House, P.O.Pulloot,

                                                Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            16.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 7/9/2005.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.811/06  filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :                       Sidique, S/o.Kunjimuhammed, Kunjikkal

                                                house, P.O.Eriyad, Kodungallur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            17.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 18/6/02.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.812/06  filed on 16/10/06

Complainant    :           Sini Nazeer, W/o.Nazeer, Vediyil House,

                                    P.O.Pulloot, Kodungllur, Thrissur.

                                    (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            18.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.50,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 1/10/05.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.837/06  filed on 20/10/06

Complainant    :                       Sonia (Minor) rep. by father Sidique,

                                                S//o.Kunjakkal Kunjimuhammed, Eriyad

                                                Desom, Kodungallur Taluk.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

              19.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.15,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 30/9/99.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.838/06 filed on 20/10/06

Complainant    :                       Hamsa,S/o.Abdulla, Mey Fair,  

                                                Kodungallur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            20.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.4,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 29/7/05.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.839/06  filed on 20/10/06

Complainant    :                       Sahnas Sidique, S/o.Sidique, Kunjakkal House,

                                                P.O.Eriyad, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            21.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 27/3/97.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                     CC.840/06 filed on  20/10/06

Complainant    :                       Salam @ Abdul Salam, S/o.Muhammed,

                                                Vediyil House, P.O.Eriyad, Kodungallur,

                                                Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ….

            22.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 27/10/05.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.868/06 31/10/06

Complainant    :           Shameeda Sadique, W/o.Sadique, Ayyarin

                                    House, P.O.Eriyad, Kodungallur, Thrissur.

                                    (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ……

            23.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 27/6/2000.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.869/06  filed on 31/10/06

Complainant    :           Abdul Salam, S/o.Moidu Haji, Kadambottu

                                    House,Edavilangu, Kara, Kodungallur.

                                    (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            24.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 2/4/1997.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.870/06 filed on 31/10/06

Complainant    :           Shameena.P.K., W/o.Ibrahimkutty,

                                    Karukapadath Vediyil, P.O.Eriyad, Thrissur.

                                    (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            25.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 28/9/04.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.871/06 filed on  31/10/06

Complainant    :           Ummukulsu, W/o.Abdul Rahiman,

                                    Karukapadath Puthen veedu, P.O.Eriyad,

                                    Thrissur.

                                    (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            26.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 6/5/04.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.904/06  filed on 3/11/06

Complainant    :           Fathima Ibrahim, W/o.Ibrahim,  Vediyil House,

                                    P.O.Pulloot, Thrissur.

                                    (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ……

            27.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.2,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 25/10/03.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.905/06 filed on 28/10/06

Complainant    :                       Sidique, S/o.Kunjimuhammed, Kunjikkal House,

                                                P.O.Eriyad, Thrssur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            28.The case of the complainant is that he has deposited Rs.50,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on 1/2/2000.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.1173/06 filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Shahanas Sidique, W/o.Sidique, Kunjakkal, P.O.Eriyad,

                                                Kodungallur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ……

            29.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.10,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  30/9o/99.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.1174/06 filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Umaira Ismail, W/o.Ismail, Manjana House,

                                                P.O.Konathukunnu, Kodungallur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            30.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.50,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  19/7/94.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.1175/06  filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Fousia Ismail, D/o.Ismail, Manjana House,

                                                P.O.Konathukunnu, Kodungallur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ……

              31.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.65,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  14/8/99.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 18% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.1177/06  filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Umaira Ismail, W/o.Ismail, Manjana House,

                                                P.O.Konathukunnu, Kodungallur, Thrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            32.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  2/9/93.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 18% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.1178/06 filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Nasmi Sidhique(minor), rep by father Sidhique,

                                                Kunjakkal House, Eriyad.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            33.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.1,50,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  4/8/2003.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.1179/06 filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Mehnas(minor),D/o.Rafeek Rahman,  rep by Mother

                                                Rahmath Rahman, Njaveliparambil House,

                                                Narayanamamgalam.P.O., Kodungallur Tauk.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ……

            34.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.3,00,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  17/11/05.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.1180/06 filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Fousia Ismail, D/o.Ismail,Manjana House,

                                                P.O.Konathukunnu, Kodungallur, Thbrissur.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ……

            35.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.35,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  14/8/99.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 18% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                    CC.1181/06 filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Naima(minor), D/o.Kunjakkal Sidhique, rep. by father

                                                Sidhique, S/o.Kunjakkal Kunjimuhammed, Eriyad

                                                Desom, Kodungallur Taluk.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            ……

            36.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.90,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  30/4/99.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

                                                CC.1182/06  filed on 30/12/06

Complainant    :                       Naima(minor), D/o.Kunjakkal Sidhique, rep. by father

                                                Sidhique, S/o.Kunjakkal Kunjimuhammed, Eriyad

                                                Desom, Kodungallur Taluk.

                                                (By Adv.P.U.Ali, Thrissur)

                                                            …..

            37.The case of the complainant is that she has deposited Rs.10,000/- with the 1^st opposite party company on  30/9/99.  The 2^nd opposite party was the managing partner and  3^rd to 8^th opposite parties were the partners of the firm.  The opposite parties assured 15% interest  for the deposit.  Accordingly up to November 2005 they paid the interest for the deposit.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor  the deposit amount returned.  When the opposite parties  defaulted to pay the interest, the complainant approached them and demanded the deposit amount.  Whereas the opposite parties prolonged the matter saying some or other reason  without returning the amount.  Hence the complainant demanded the amount with interest at last on 26/6/06.  But the opposite parties have not returned any amount to the complainant.  The opposite parties received the  deposit amount and paid the interest to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum.    The act of the opposite parties, after collecting the deposit amount and without returning it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

            38.Being noticed on the complaint, all the opposite parties entered appearance through different counsels.  In all the ases opposite parties are same.  The 1^st, 2^nd and 7^th opposite parties filed a common version, in which they have denied all the allegations raised in the complaint in detail.  According to them this complaint cannot be considered as a consumer complaint as contemplated under Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  There is no service availed by the complainant from the opposite parties.  They further contended that this Forum does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  According to them the 1^st opposite party is a firm having its registered office at Kaloor, Ernakulum and all other opposite parties are  only partners of the 1^st opposite party firm.  Since the opposite parties worked for gain at Ernakulum, this Forum  do not have jurisdiction to entertain the above complaint.  Only the 3^rd and 4^th opposite parties having  their  residential address within the jurisdiction of this Forum.

            39.These opposite parties further submitted that the above  complaint is barred by limitation.  The complainant paid Rs.40,000/- to the 1^st opposite party on 1/8/98.  There was no  term fixed for the alleged deposit.  Therefore the period of limitation starts from the date of deposit, that is from 1/8/98.  Since the complaint is filed  long  after the period of limitation, this complaint is barred by limitation.

            40.According to these opposite parties, the 1^st opposite party is a registered firm and not a banking company.  The object of the firm is to carry on the trading of all kinds of bearings   including the imported items automobile spare part accessories, lubricants, oils and other consumables.  The firm was making good profit in business from 1993 onwards.  The Cochin Bearing centre was accepting deposits from the persons who are interested in business from 1993 onwards.  The 1^st opposite party being the  Managing partner was running the business successfully as per the decision of the partners.  The profit  from the firm was proportionately distributed to all the persons who were made investments and the deposits.   It was specifically informed to the depositors that the deposit received from them shall be subject to market risk.  Attracted by the profits of the firm, many persons including the complainant expressed their willingness to invest some capital towards business, so that they can get profit share.  Since the firm was running on profit, the complainant expressed her desire to invest an amount of Rs.40,000/- on 1/8/98.  The 1^st opposite party agreed to pay profit share for the sum.  These opposite parties denied the averment stated in the complaint that the 1^st opposite party agreed   to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum.  Accordingly profit shares were given to the complainant at the rate varying from 12% to 24% during various years till December 2005.  Thereafter, the profit shared could not be given as they suffered huge losses in the business.  They further submitted that the opposite parities never requested the complainant to deposit any amount with Cochin  Bearing Centre and never agreed to return the said amount on demand.  The complainant invested the amount to the 1^st opposite party firm subject to the marked risk and she is entitled for profit share only when the firm  capable to making profit.  Due to the illegal acts of  the complainant and other similarly  situated  persons, the business  of the  firm was closed down and the complainant  relative one Mr.K.A.Muhammed Ibrahim was acting as a member of the  monetary committee  formed by the depositors along with others had forcefully taken  away the documents of the firm in an attempt to close down the business  and  malign  the opposite parties.  According to them the complainant is entitled for profit share, only when the business is running profit  and the complainant is duty bound to share the loss of the business also.

            41. They denied the averments stated in the 2^nd para of the complaint.  The complainant never approached the opposite parties for return of the amount.  These opposite parties admitted that the profit share was paid upto December 2005 to the complainant.  And thereafter they were unable to pay off the profit share that the business entered in huge loss.  The nonpayment of profit share was informed to the depositors including the complainant.  The complainant along with others also gave a complaint to the Police.  But the same was in vain.  They also had taken high handed action along with their relatives and certain other depositors, which resulted in the running of the goodwill of the firm.  They further submitted that they have never tried to  cheat any of the depositors including the complainant.

            42. These opposite parties further submitted that the complainant has not availed any service from the opposite parties as contemplated under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.  They also submitted that they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice towards the complainant.  All the opposite parties tried to sort out the matter by continuing to run the business of the firm which should have been picked up if the complainant along with other depositors were willing to wait till the finance of the firm recovered. Instead of that the complainant along with others formed into a group   and together demanded back entire deposits and created all kinds of nuisance against the   continuance of the business.  They also raised false allegations and complaint before the Police.  They further submitted that there was no agreement to return the alleged deposit.  The agreement  was only to pay profit share.  Profit share from December 2005 was not paid, that the firm faced huge loss in business.  They also submitted that the complainants are bound to suffer the losses to the extent of their deposit.  The complainants are not entitled to get the deposit amount returned.  They prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with cost.

            43. 3^rd and 4^th opposite parties filed a common version, in which they have denied all the allegations stated in the complaint in detail.  According to them the complainant and the 2^nd opposite party colluded  and filed this complaint only to cause hardship to these opposite parties.  They also raised the contention regarding imitation, maintainability etc. which are raised by the other opposite parties.  According to them the 1^st opposite party firm was formed only to conduct business of automobiles, spare parts and its connected materials.  There was no intention to collect deposits and to pay any profits to the depositor.  The firm was not obtained any permission from the R.B.I for accepting deposits and to pay interest for that.  These opposite parties further submitted that if at all any document was created by the complainant in collusion with the 2^nd opposite party; these opposite parties are not liable for that document.

            44. They further submitted that both of them were employed in foreign countries from long back and there was no direct involvement of the day to day affairs of the 1^st opposite party firm.  According to them the complainant has not deposited any single paise with the 1^st opposite party firm as per records and statement of the firm.  They denied the allegation that the 1^st opposite party firm has offered 12% interest for the deposits accepted from the complainant.  There was no such cause and need happened to the 1^st opposite party firm.  They also denied the further allegation that the 1^st opposite party firm denied to return the deposit amount and another allegation that the complainant demanded to return the deposit amount with these opposite parties.  They also denied the date of cause of action created in the complaint on 26/6/06.  They also contended that there was no cause of action for this complaint involved within the jurisdiction of Thrissur district.  Since they were residing at abroad, there was no reason to accept any amount from the complainant or to pay any interest to the complainant.  The registered office of the 1^st opposite party firm was working at Ernakulam district.  Hence this complaint will not come within the jurisdiction of this Forum.  They further submitted that they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice towards the complainant and there was no consumer dispute prevailed between them and the complainant.  They strictly contended that the complainant is not at all entitled to get any relief as prayed in the complaint.  They further contended that they never authorized the 2^nd opposite party to accept deposit and to pay profits of those deposits for and on behalf of Cochin Bearing Centre.  No money is collected from the complainant towards the firm and nothing is shown in the accounts of the firm.  These opposite parties prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.

            45. 5^th, 6^th and 8^th opposite parties jointly filed another version in which they have also raised similar contentions raised by other opposite parties regarding the maintainability and the jurisdiction of this complaint.  These opposite parties contended that they have not collected any amount from the complainant and they also not paid any profit share or interest to the complainant.  If at all any transactions were made between the complainant and the 2^nd opposite party without the consent and knowledge of these opposite parties, they are not liable to pay any single paise to the complainant based on such transaction.  They never offered any service to the complainant.  They categorically denied all the allegations stated in the complaint in detail.  According to these opposite parties a partnership deed was created by the 2^nd opposite party and the entire transactions were directly conducted and controlled by the 2^nd opposite party only.  These opposite parties were   sleeping partners only.  No decisions were taken by the partners to conduct any banking business by the firm.  Similarly no decision was taken either to accept deposits or to pay any interest on that deposit.  All the alleged deposits were accepted by the 2^nd opposite party as per his own wish and will.  Therefore these opposite parties are not liable for that.  The 2^nd opposite party has collected deposits from several persons not in the ordinary course of business of the firm.  For the illegal act committed by the 2^nd opposite party, other partners cannot be held liable.  The 2^nd opposite party misused the reputation of the firm to make benefits to himself.  For those illegal acts, these opposite parties cannot be held liable.  The 2^nd opposite party has not published the account of the firm to  other partners.  No partners, except the 2^nd opposite party, collected any amount as deposit from any persons.  They also not assured to anybody regarding interest for the deposits.

            46.The deposit admittedly collected by the 2^nd opposite party has not shown in the accounts of the firm and except the 2^nd opposite party, no other opposite parties has received any benefits of the deposits collected by the 2^nd opposite party in the  name of the firm.  He collected the deposits only for his personal benefits.

            47.. According to these opposite parties the 5^th opposite party was occupied several reputed posts in several committees and social organizations.  Such a person never commits such illegal acts as alleged in the complaint.  These opposite parties are included in the complaint only with a malafide intention to make undue gain by raising threat against their reputation.  They further submitted that they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice towards the complainant or anyone else and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with cost.

              48.Then the case was tried jointly by allowing the application filed from the side of opposite parties.  Common evidence was adduced by both sides.  The points for consideration are that :

1) Whether the complaint is maintainable ?

2) Whether this Forum has got jurisdiction to entertain these complaints?

3) Whether any unfair trade practice  or deficiency in service happened on the part of opposite parties ?

4) If so what costs and reliefs ?

            49. From the side of complainant one Mr.Sidhique was examined as PW1 and the complainant in CC.765/06 and 770/06 one Mr.Shahul Hameed is examined as PW2.  Both of them filed detailed proof  affidavit and vehemently cross examined by the counsel for the opposite parties.  From the side of opposite parties, the 2^nd opposite party is examined as RW1, one Mr.Abdulla was examined as RW2, one Mr.M.M.Faizal was examined as RW3, one Mr.P.M.Muhammed was examined as RW4 and one Mr.Abbas.M.K. was examined as RW5.  RW1 to RW4 were filed detailed  counter proof affidavit and all of them were thoroughly cross examined by the counsels for the complainant and other opposite parties. 

            50.From the side of complainants 46 documents produced and marked as Exts.P1 to P.46.  Ext.P1 is cash receipt No.249 for Rs.40,000/- dated 1/8/98, Ext.P2 is cash receipt No.369 for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 2/4/04, Ext.P3 is cash receipt No.530 for Rs.75,000/- dated 5/6/99, Ext.P4 is cash receipt No.314 for Rs.1,00,000/- dated 4/12/97, Ext.P5 is cash receipt No.448 for Rs.4,00,000 dated 1/8/05, Ext.P6 is cash receipt No.639 for Rs.65000/- dated 09/10/2000,  Ext.P7 is cash receipt No.364 for Rs.1,50,000/- dated 1/1/04, Ext.P8 is cash receipt No.441 for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 1/6/05,  Ext.P9 is cash receipt No.217 for Rs.75,000/- dated 3/9/03, Ext.P10  is cash receipt No.55 for Rs.80,000/- dated 8/4/95,   Ext.P11 is cash receipt No.309 for Rs.1,60,000/- dated 3/6/97, Ext.P12 is cash receipt No.54 for Rs.70,000/- dated 8/4/95, Ext.P13 is cash receipt No.383 for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 12/7/04,  Ext.P14 is cash receipt No.653 for Rs.3,00,000/- dated 4/11/2000,  Ext.P15 is cash receipt No.457 for Rs.1,00,000/- dated 7/9/05,Ext.P16 is receipt No.456 for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 7/9/05, Ext.P17 is receipt No.141 for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 18/6/02, Ext.P18 is  receipt No.462 for Rs.50,000/-dated 1/10/05, Ext.P19 is receipt No.28  for Rs. 15,000 dated 30/9/99, Ext.P20 is receipt No.446 for Rs.4,00,000 dated 29/7/05, Ext.P21 is receipt No.203 for Rs.2,00,000 dated  27/3/97, Ext.P22 is receipt No.466 for Rs.1,00,000/- dated 27/10/05,  Ext.P23 is receipt No.617 for Rs.1,00,000/- dated  27/6/2000, Ext.P24 is receipt No.205 for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 2/4/97, Ext.P25 is receipt No.397 for Rs.1,00,000/- dated 28/9/04, Ext.P26 is receipt No.729 for Rs.1,00,000/-  dated 6/5/04, Ext.P27 is receipt No.231 for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 25/10/03, Ext.P28is receipt No.584 for Rs.50,000/- dated 1/2/00, Ext.P29 is receipt No.26 for Rs.10,000/- dated 30/9/99, Ext.P30 is receipt No.18 for Rs.50,000/- dated 19/7/94, Ext.P31 is receipt No.553 for Rs.65,000/- dated 14/8/99, Ext.P32 is receipt No.1 for Rs.1,00,000/- dated 2/9/93, Ext.P33 is receipt No.206 for Rs.1,50,000/- dated 4/8/03, Ext.P34 is receipt No.470 for Rs.3,00,000/- dated 17/11/05, Ext.P35 is receipt No.554 for Rs.35,000/- dated 14/8/99, Ext.P36 is receipt No.11 for Rs.90,000/- dated 30/4/99, Ext.P37 is receipt No.27 for Rs.10,000/- dated 30/9/99, Ext.P38 is notice of meeting dated 10/5/06, Ext.P39 is postal cover received by Mr.A.M.Sadique, Ext.P40 is POA of Ansar Asharaf, Ext.P41 is POA of Shahanaz etc., Ext.P42 is POA of Din, Ext.P43 is POA of Fathima, Ext.P44 is copy of POA of Sini, Ext.P45 is copy of POA of Khadeejabi etc. and Ext.P46 is POA of Shameed.

            51.From the side of opposite parties 89  documents marked as Exts.R1 to R89   .  Ext.R1 is photocopy of minutes book of the general  body  meeting held on 19/3/06 at Cochin Tower, Ernakulam, Ext.R2 is copy of POA of Muhammed Sanil, Ext.R3 is copy of partnership deed dated 1/7/97, Ext.R4 is copy of writ petition filed before the Hon’ble High Court, Ext.R5 is plaint  copy of OS.3550/06 of Sub court, Irnjalakuda, Ext.R6 is plaint copy of OS.730/06 of  Munsiff Court, Kodungallur, Ext.R7 is plaint copy of OS.481/06 of Irinjalakuda sub court, Ext.R8 is lawyer notice dated 1/8/06 received by Muhammed Salim, Ext.R9 is lawyer notice dated 1/8/06 received by Muhammed Salim, Ext.R10 is copy of FIR of crime 410/06 of Kochi City Police Station, Ext.R11 series are special term deposit receipts, Ext.R12 is copy of cash book page No.85, Ext.R13 is copy of cash book page No.138, Ext.R14 is monthly payment details of Shanaz Sidhique Ext.R15 is monthly payment details of Shanaz , Ext.R16 is payment details of Shanas Sidhique, Ext.R17 is payment details of Sidhque, Ext.R18 is payment details of Sidhique Ext.R19 is copy of cash book page 89, Ext.R20 is copy of cash book page No.142, Ext.R21 is copy of cash book page No.144, Ext.R22 is copy of cash book page No.87, Ext.R23 is copy of cash book  page No.140, Ext.R24 is payment statement of Sonia Sidhique, Ext.R25 is payment statement of Naima Sidhique, Ext.R26 is cash payment  voucher dated 21/4/06, Ext.R27 is cash payment voucher dated 2/5/06, Ext.R28 is cash payment voucher dated 21/4/06, Ext.R29 is cash payment voucher dated 3/6/06, Ext.R30 is cash payment voucher dated 2/5/06, Ext.R31 is copy of cash book page No.149, Ext.R32 is copy of cash book page No.123, Ext.R33 is copy of cash book page 148, Ext.R34 is copy of  ledger, Ext.R35 is copy of edger, Ext.R36 is statement of payment of A.M.Sidhique, Ext.R37 is statement of payment of Shameela Sidhique, Ext.R38 is statement of payment of Shameela Sidhique, Ext.R39 is copy of ledger page 45, Ext.R40 is copy of ledger page 47, Ext.R41 is copy of ledger page 51, Ext.R42 is copy of ledger page 55, Ext.R43 is copy of cash book page 59, Ext.R44 is copy of cash book page 56, Ext.R45 is copy of cash book page 61, Ext.R46 is copy of ledger page 3, Ext.R47 is copy of ledger page 16, Ext.R48 is copy of ledger page 22, Ext.R49 is copy of ledger page 86, Ext.R50 is payment statement of Saidu,  Ext.R51 is payment statement of Saidu, Ext.R52 is payment statement , Ext.R53 is payment statement of Rahmath, Ext.R54 is payment statement of Muhammed Salih, Ext.R55 is payment statement  of Mehnas, Ext.R56 is payment, Ext.R57 is payment statement of Ameena Laathif, Ext.R58 is account statement of S.B.Bikaner and Jaipur, Ext.R59 is copy of cash book page 105, Ext.R60 is copy of cash book page 98, Ext.R61 is payment statement of Fathima Ibrahim, Ext.R62 is payment statement of Bini, Ext.R63 is payment statement of Sini, Ext.R64 is payment statement of Sini, Ext.R65 is plaint copy of OS250/06 of Kodungallur Munsiff  court, Ext.R66 is copy of cash book page 230, Ext.R67 is copy of cash book page 312, Ext.R68 is copy of cash book page 318, Ext.R69 is account statement of Umaira, Ext.R70 is payment statement of Umaira Ismail, Ext.R71 is payment statement of Fouzia Ismail, Ext.R72 is copy of ledger page 6, Ext.R73 is statement o payment of Shahul Hameed, Ext.R74 is statement of payment of Shahulhameed, Ext.R75 is copy of ledger page 187, Ext.R76 is statement of payment of Hamza, Ext.R77 is payment statement of Hamza, Ext.R78 is copy of cash book page 19, Ext.R79 is payment statement of Ummukulsu, Ext.R80 is payment statement of Ummukulsu, Ext.R81 is copy of cash book page 87, Ext.R82 is payment statement of Shameer, Ext.R83 is copy of cash book page 246, Ext.R84 is payment statement of Abdul Salam, Ext.R85 is copy of audit report, Ext.R86 is order copy of I.O. commercial taxes, Ext.R87 is certified copy of proof affidavit in OS.502/06 of  Sub court, Ernakulam, Ext.R88 is certified copy  order in CC.348/07of  C.D.R.F, Ernakulam and Ext.R89 is certified copy of order in CC.349/07 of CDRF, Ernakulam.

            52.According to the complainants they have  made fixed deposits with the Cochin Bearng Centre  canvassed by the  opposite parties.  Upto Novermber 2005, the opposite parties paid interest.  Thereafter neither any interest paid nor the amount returned.  Whereas the opposite parties contended that the complainants attracted by the profits of the firm expressed their willingness to invest some capital towards the business to get profit share.  Neither any fixed deposits made by the complainant nor any interest received from the opposite parties. The opposite parties contested the case in  three groups.  The  1^st, 2^nd and 7^th opposite parties formed a group and 3^rd & 4^th opposite parties formed another group and the 5^th, 6^th and 8^th opposite parties formed other group.  However they contested the matter separately, the contentions were one and similar.  The main allegation raised by the opposite parties was against the 2^nd opposite party, who was the Managing Partner of the Cochin Bearing Centre.  The main contentions raised by the 1^st, 2^nd and 7^th opposite parties are :

The complaint cannot be considererd as a consumer complaint, since the complainants are made their investments in the capital of the business for getting profit share only.  There was no consumer service provider relationship between the complainants and the opposite parties.  Another contention raised was that there is no territorial jurisdiction for this Forum to entertain this complaint.  The reason stated is that the partnership firm situated at Ernakulam and all the alleged transactions   were made at the office of the firm at Ernakulam.  No amount was collected from the complainanats anywhere  else.   Similarly the profit shares were also paid at Ernakulam.  Therefore this Forum has no jurisdiction as alleged in the complaint.  Another contention raised by the opposite parties is that they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice towards the complainants.  They paid profit share to all the complainants inrespect totheir investments in the capital till December 2005.  Thereafter the profit share could not be given as they suffered huge loss in the business.  From the side of complainants and the opposite parties, detailed argument notes were submitted and we elaborately heard the learned counsels for both sides.

            53.Regarding the maintainability of the complaint, the case of the complainants is that the opposite parties accepted fixed deposits by assuring 12% interest.  Accordingly fixed deposite receipts were issued to the complainant signed by the Managing Partner.  In all the 37 cases, they produced original receipts given by the opposite parties.  All the receipts are shown as cash receipt.  We have gone through the documents produced from both sides and perused the  contents of affidavits filed.  Here the burden is upon the complainants to prove before the Forum that they have made fixed deposits with the opposite parties.  All the 37 deposit receipts are cash receipts.  Nowhere it is stated as a fixed deposit receipt.  The receipts are not duly stamped.  No maturity date is shown in any receipt.  In majority of the receipts nothing mentioned regarding the interest rate.  In some receipts interest has shown as 12%.  But in other receipts it is shown as 15%.  In two receipts it is stated as 18%.  There is no uniformity for the interest rate shown in the cash receipts.  Similarly there is no uniformity for the receipts in the nature of the receipts produced.  There is no uniformity for the contents of the receipts.  To consider it as a fixed deposit recipt, the receipts should be sufficiently stamped.  The period and nature of deposit has to be mentioned on the receipt.  Nothing is seen on the receipts produced.  Since there is a specific denial from the side of opposite parties, that the receipts given are not fixed deposit receipts but only cash receipts, issued while accepting investments towards capital of the firm, the burden is heavy upon the complainants to prove before the Forum with convincing evidences and prove that they have made fixed deposit with the opposite parties.  Considering the available records on file, we  donot find any reason to accept the claim of the complainant that they have made fixed deposit with the  oppositel parties.  But the evidences  lead us to believe that the complainants are made business  investments with the 1^st opposite party firm and they accept profit share from the opposite parties.   The account statement produced from the side of opposite parties support the contentions raised by them.  Considering all these points, we are of the opinion that the transactions alleged in the complaint are only business transactions made between the complainants and the opposite parties with an intention to make profits.  Therefore these complaints cannot be considered as consumer complaints.  Hence not maintainable.

            54.Another point to be considered is that whether this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  The complaints are filed stating that some of the opposite parties collected the alleged fixed deposit amounts from the residenes of complainants  situated within the jurisdiction of this Froum and they paid interest to the complainants at their residences situated within the jurisdiction of this Forum.  Hence this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  Whereas the opposite parties catagorically contended that all the alleged business transactions were happened only at the head office of the firm situated at Ernakulam.  Neither any amount collected from the complainants nor any amount paid as interest to the complainant at their residences as alleged in the complaints.  Here the burden is upon the complainants to prove before the Forum that they have made payments to the opposite parties at their residences and also received interest from the opposite parties at their residences.  Except the oral testimony of PW1 and PW2, there is no other proof adduced from the side of complainants.  However the proof affidavits filed by PW1 and PW2, they are not representing the entire complainants in these cases.  All the complainants are having different date of cause of action and place of cause of actions.  However, a joint trial was allowed on the request of opposite parties,, the  responsibility to  prove  the cause of action remains with complainants.  PW1 and PW2 were not  confident  about  the complainants to whom they represent with regard to their mode of deposits, place of deposits etc.  It can be seen from the cross examination of PW1 and PW2.  At the same time the opposite parties and their witnesses strongly deposed before the Forum that they collected only business investments from the complainants and issued profit shares to them inrespect to their investments,  according to the profit  accrued in the business of the firm.  No amount was either collected from their residences or paid to them at their residences.  The entire transactions were made only at the registered office at Kaloor in Ernakulam.   The learned counsel for opposite parties vehemently argued that however, the  addresses of two opposite parties shown are their personal  residential addresses which come within the jurisdiction of this Forum,  they all are acted only as per their official capacity as partners of the firm.  Hence the address of the firm can only be considered. 

            55.Considering the points discussed hereinabove, we are of the opinion  that the complainants are miserably failed to substantially prove before the Forum that they have made fixed deposits with the opposite parties and the amount was collected by any of the opposite parties from their residences and interest were paid by the opposite parties at their residences.  Therefore we are of the opinion that there is no pecuniary jurisdiction for this Forum to entertain these complaints.

            56.The other point to be considered is that whether any unfair trade practice or deficiency in service happened on the part of any of the opposite parties.  Since the 1^st and 2^nd points are answered against the complainants, this point is also answered accordingly.

            57.In the result we dismiss all the 37 complaints without cost.

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 30^th day  of November  2017.

      Sd/-                                    Sd/-                                              Sd/-

M.P.Chandrakumar               Sheena.V.V.                                 P.K.Sasi,

Member                                 Member                                       President.

                                                Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits

Ext.P1 Exts.P1 to P37 – Cash receipts (37 Nos.)

Ext.P38 notice of meeting dated 10/5/06,

Ext.P39 postal cover received by Mr.A.M.Sadique,

Ext.P40 POA of Ansar Asharaf,

Ext.P41 POA of Shahanaz etc.,

Ext.P42 POA of Din,

Ext.P43 POA of Fathima,

Ext.P44 copy of POA of Sini,

Ext.P45  copy of POA of Khadeejabi etc.

Ext.P46 POA of Shameed.

Complainants witnesses

PW1 – K.K.Sidhique

PW2 – Shahul Hameed

Opposite Parties Exhibits

Ext.R1 - photocopy of minutes book of the general  body  meeting, Ext.R2 - copy of POA of Muhammed Sanil, Ext.R3 - copy of partnership deed dated 1/7/97, Ext.R4 - copy of writ petition filed before the Hon’ble High Court, Ext.R5 - plaint  copy of OS.3550/06 of Sub court, Irnjalakuda, Ext.R6 - plaint copy of OS.730/06 of  Munsiff Court, Kodungallu, Ext.R7 - plaint copy of OS.481/06 of Irinjalakuda sub court, Ext.R8 -lawyer notice dated 1/8/06 received by Muhammed Salim, Ext.R9 - lawyer notice dated 1/8/06 received by Muhammed Salim, Ext.R10 - copy of FIR of crime 410/06 of Kochi City Police Station, Ext.R11 series - special term deposit receipts, Ext.R12 - copy of cash book page No.85, Ext.R13 - copy of cash book page No.138, Ext.R14 -monthly payment details of Shanaz Sidhique, Ext.R15 - monthly payment details of Shanaz , Ext.R16 - payment details of Shanas Sidhique, Ext.R17 - payment details of Sidhque, Ext.R18 - payment details of Sidhique, Ext.R19 - copy of cash book page 89, Ext.R20 - copy of cash book page No.142, Ext.R21 - copy of cash book page No.144, Ext.R22 - copy of cash book page No.87, Ext.R23 - copy of cash book  page No.140, Ext.R24 - payment statement of Sonia Sidhique, Ext.R25 - payment statement of Naima Sidhique, Ext.R26 - cash payment  voucher dated 21/4/06, Ext.R27 - cash payment voucher dated 2/5/06, Ext.R28 - cash payment voucher dated 21/4/06, Ext.R29 - cash payment voucher dated 3/6/06, Ext.R30 - cash payment voucher dated 2/5/06, Ext.R31 - copy of cash book page No.149, Ext.R32 - copy of cash book page No.123, Ext.R33 - copy of cash book page 148, Ext.R34 - copy of  ledger, Ext.R35 - copy of ledger, Ext.R36 - statement of payment of A.M.Sidhique, Ext.R37 is statement of payment of Shameela Sidhique, Ext.R38 - statement of payment of Shameela Sidhique, Ext.R39 - copy of ledger page 45, Ext.R40 - copy of ledger page 47, Ext.R41 - copy of ledger page 51, Ext.R42 - copy of ledger page 55, Ext.R43 - copy of cash book page 59, Ext.R44 - copy of cash book page 56, Ext.R45 -copy of cash book page 61, Ext.R46 - copy of ledger page 3, Ext.R47 - copy of ledger page 16, Ext.R48 - copy of ledger page 22, Ext.R49 - copy of ledger page 86, Ext.R50 - payment statement of Saidu,  Ext.R51 - payment statement of Saidu, Ext.R52 payment statement , Ext.R53 - payment statement of Rahmath, Ext.R54 - payment statement of Muhammed Salih, Ext.R55 - payment statement  of Mehnas, Ext.R56 -payment, Ext.R57 -payment statement of Ameena Laathif, Ext.R58 -  account statement of S.B.Bikaner and Jaipur, Ext.R59- copy of cash book page 105,

Ext.R60 - copy of cash book page 98, Ext.R61 - payment statement of Fathima Ibrahim, Ext.R62 - payment statement of Bini, Ext.R63 is payment statement of Sini, Ext.R64 is payment statement of Sini, Ext.R65 is plint copy of OS250/06 of Kodungallur Munsiff  court, Ext.R66 is copy of cash book page 230, Ext.R67 is copy of cash book page 312, Ext.R68 is copy of cash book page 318, Ext.R69 is account statement of Umaira, Ext.R70 is payment statement of Umaira Ismail, Ext.R71 is payment statement of Fouzia Ismail, Ext.R72 is copy of ledger page 6, Ext.R73 is statement o payment of Shahul Hameed, Ext.R74 is statement of payment of Shahulhameed, Ext.R75 is copy of ledger page 187, Ext.R76 is statement of payment of Hamza, Ext.R77 is payment statement of Hamza, Ext.R78 is copy of cash book page 19, Ext.R79 is payment statement of Ummukulsu, Ext.R80 is payment statement of Ummukulsu, Ext.R81 is copy of cash book page 87, Ext.R82 is payment statement of Shameer, Ext.R83 is copy of cash book page 246, Ext.R84 is payment statement of Abdul Salam, Ext.R85 is copy of audit report, Ext.R86 is order copy of I.O. commercial taxes, Ext.R87 is certified copy of proof affidavit in OS.502/06 of  Sub court, Ernakulam, Ext.R88 is certified copy  order in CC.348/07of  C.D.R.F, Ernakulam and Ext.R89 is certified copy of order in CC.349/07 of CDRF, Ernakulam.

Opposite Parties witnesses

RW1 – P.M.Muhammed Salim

RW2 – Abdulla.V.I.

RW3 - M.M.Faizal

RW4 - P.M.Muhammed

RW5 - Abbas.M.K

                                                                                                                    Id/-

                                                                                                            President