This complaint coming up before us for hearing on                      27-10-11 in the presence of Sri K. Sankara Rao, Advocate for complainant and of Sri A.S.R.K. Reddy, advocate for opposite party, upon perusing the material on record, hearing both sides and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Forum made the following:

O R D E R

Per Sri M.V.L.Radha Krishna Murthy, Member:

This complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act praying to direct opposite party to render accounts for the payments made by the complainant towards chit PDL 02F-33 considering the receipts bearing Nos.12013 dated 23-06-10, 12831 dated 30-08-10 and 14785 dated 30-11-10 to issue call letters for other chits of the complainant along with account copies and for damages of Rs.1,00,000/- for subjecting the complainant for mental agony and harassment and for costs.

2.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

        Complainant joined as a member in group No.PDL 02F-33 chit of Rs.1,00,000/-  of which duration was fixed for 40 monthly installments at Rs.2500/-.   Complainant paid some amounts and they were accounted for. Complainant made payments of Rs.5,500/- on 23-06-10 under receipt No.12013, Rs.5,000/- on 30-08-10 under receipt No.12831 and Rs.25,000/- on 30-11-10 under receipt No.14785 and the said amounts were not credited to the chit PDL 02F-33.    Complainant paid Rs.25,000/- on 30-11-10 on receipt of letter from opposite party dated 06-11-10 removing the complainant from the membership and later opposite party assured complainant that no action will be taken in removing the complainant from the membership of chit No.PDL 02F-33. Moreover, opposite party harassing complainant by sending indecent SMS after the issuance of notice dated 30-12-10 by the complainant.    The said notice was refused by the opposite party.   Later complainant issued another notice dated 06-01-11 to opposite party and the same was also refused by opposite party.   The opposite party has not issued account copy as required by the complainant.

        Complainant is also number of two other chits PDT IOE – 41 for Rs.50,000/- of 50 months and PDL 02F -38 of Rs.1,00,000/- with duration of 40 months.   Complainant is unable to pay the installments from December due to non co-operation of the opposite party.   The chit bearing No.PDL 02F-33 was shown as surety for another chit PDL 02F-38 of Rs.1,00,000/- and also another chit for Rs.50,000/-.  The opposite party is threatening the complainant that they will not allow the complainant to take away the amount of the chits and are not allowing the complainant to pay the amounts and not intimating the installment amounts of the chits and the said acts of the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service.   Hence the complaint.

3.   Opposite party filed its version which is in brief is as follows:       

The material allegations in the complaint are false fabricated and complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts.   It is true that the complainant joined in chit  No.PDL 0F -33 and PDL 02F-38 at Piduguralla branch maintained by opposite party and agreed to subscribe @ Rs.2500/- pm in 40 monthly installments for the chit amount of the Rs.1,00,000/- each. Complainant also joined in another chit PDT 10E - 41 of Rs.50,000/-, monthly subscription being Rs.1,000/- in 50 installments. The complainant was prized subscriber in chit Nos.PDL 02F-38 and PDT 10E–41 on 01-10-09 and                 24-01-08 respectively.   Complainant committed default in chit No.PDL 02F -33 and paid only eight installments.  The said chit PDL 02F -33 was pledged to the chit PDT 10E-41.  As per clause 17 of chit agreement opposite party is at liberty to remove the subscriber who continuously committed default in payment of three installments.    As Such opposite party gave notice dated 06-11-10 to the complainant for removal as he fell in arrears of 6 installments (less dividends) for Rs.11,986/-.   Accordingly on 07-12-10 the foreman of the opposite party removed the complainant by issuing removal notice and adjusted the amount of Rs.11,800/- lying in chit No.PDL 02F -33 to his prized chit PDT 10E-41.    Complainant was a defaulter from the three chits prized and non prized. 

Subsequently complainant approached the collection incharge by name S. Bureswamy and represented to him that he gave a post dated cheque bearing No.937903 on 30-11-10 by putting date 03-01-11 drawn on HDFC Bank for Rs.39,200/- in favour of opposite party and it will be honoured and requested to issue receipts.   Accordingly the above named collection in charge believing the words of the complainant issued temporary receipts bearing Nos.14785 for Rs.25,000/- and receipt No.14784 for Rs.4,300/- and receipt No.14783 for Rs.9,900/- totaling Rs.39,200/- on 30-11-10.    Subsequently the collection agent when presented the said cheque in Andhra Bank he was informed by Bank officer that there is error by way of oblique before figure return in box column of cheque and unless and until it is corrected and signed by maker of the cheque it cannot be received for sending it for collection and thereby returned the cheque to the collection in charge.   From there onwards the collection in charge making trips to the house of the complainant at Guntur and other places to collect the same and receive the amount. Taking advantage of the temporary receipts dated 30-11-10 complainant approached this Forum and filed the complaint posing himself regular in payment of installments and opposite party illegally terminated him from the membership.   The complainant is defaulter of three chits and is liable for payment of future installments in the two prized chits.   Hence the complaint may be dismissed.

4.    Complainant and opposite party filed their respective affidavits in support of their versions reiterating the same.  

        On behalf of complainant Exs.A-1 to A-9 and on behalf of opposite party Exs.B-1 to B-8 were marked.     

5.  Now the points for consideration is

        1.  Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the                        opposite party?

        2.   To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

1. POINT No.1:-   The case of the complainant is that he joined in three chits of opposite party and he became prized subscriber of two chits and paying installments, in chit bearing No.PDL 02F-33  he paid Rs.5,500/- on 23-06-10 under receipt No.12013 and Rs.5,000/-on            30-08-10 under receipt No.12831 and Rs.25,000/- on 30-11-10 under receipt No.14785 and the said amounts were not credited by opposite party and issued notice dated 06-11-10 for removal of his membership and removed him from the membership of the said chit which amounts to deficiency of service.

1.     The case of the opposite party is that the complainant is a prized subscriber of two chits and committed default in the two prized chits and also in non prized chit and that there by they have removed the complainant from the membership of non prized chit and that there is no deficiency of service on their part. 

8.   It is not in dispute that the complainant is a member of two prized chits and one non prized chit run by opposite party.  It is also not in

dispute that non prized chit bearing No.PDL 02F-33 was pledged to the prized chits. 

9.   As seen from Exs.A-1 to A-3 the complainant paid an amount of Rs.5270/- on 23-06-10 under receipt No.12013 (Ex.A-1) and paid Rs.5,000/- on 30-08-10 under receipt No.12831 (Ex.A-2) and also paid Rs.25,000/- on 30-11-10 under receipt No.14785 (Ex.A-3)  by way of cash to the credit of non prized chit PDL 02 F -33.    The said amounts are not shown in the account copy Ex.B-8 filed by the opposite party.  Therefore it can safely be concluded that opposite party has not given credit to the above said amounts paid by the complainant.  Further opposite party issued notice dated                  06-11-10 (Ex.A-6) to the complainant stating that he has not paid the arrears inspite of notice sent to him on 03-09-10 and hence they are constrained to remove him from membership on 06-11-10 and also stated that an amount of Rs.11,986/- is due to the complainant, payable on termination of the chit.   But in the version of opposite party it was mentioned that the foreman of opposite party gave notice dated 06-11-10 for removal of membership as he fell in arrears of six installments for Rs.11,986/-. Thus the version of opposite party is different from the contents of Ex.A-6.   Moreover, the version of opposite party is that complainant approached the collection agent and represented that he gave a post dated cheque bearing No.937903 dated 30-11-10 with date 03-01-11 drawn on HDFC bank for Rs.39,200/- in favour of opposite party and requested to issue receipts for which the collecting in charge obliged and gave three receipts bearing Nos.14785 for Rs.25,000/-, 14784 for Rs.4,300/- and 14783 for Rs.9,900/- totaling Rs.39,200/- on 30-11-10. The above said version of opposite party is against the natural conduct of a prudent man.    It also the case of the opposite party that when the said post dated cheque when presented in the bank by the collection agent the bank officer informed him that there is an error by way of oblique before the figure and that unless it is corrected and signed by the person who issued cheque it cannot be received.   The said cheque alleged to have been given by complainant was filed by opposite party and the same was marked as Ex.B-1.   As seen from Ex.B-1 cheque it was signed with black ink and the figures were mentioned in the black ink while the cheque was filled with the blue ink with date 03-01-11.  The case of the opposite party is that complainant gave post dated cheque.  If the said cheque was actually given by the complainant with post date 03-1-11 the signature and the date also would have been with the same ink.   But the date is with blue ink and the signature is with black ink.   The complainant filed three receipts under Exs.A-1 to A-3 and it is his case that the amounts mentioned in the Exs.A-1 to            A-3 are not credited to the account of non prized chit.    But the case of the opposite party is that their collection in charge issued three copies of receipts Exs.B-3 to B-5 dated 30-11-10 on representation of the complainant that he has given a post dated cheque.   But B-4 and B-5 receipts dt.30-11-10 are not questioned by the complainant and they have no relation with Exs.A-1 and A-2. Moreover Ex.B-5 copy of receipt does not relate to the non prized chit of the complainant and it relates to the prized chit of the complainant.   The questioned cheques of complainant Ex.A-1 and A-2 are different to that of Ex.B-4 and B-5 copies of receipts.   Ex.A-3 is the original receipt and Ex.B-3 is the copy of the same.   In Ex.A-3 original receipt it shows that the complainant paid the amount by way of cash.   Whereas in Ex.B-3 copy of Ex.A-3 shows that complainant paid Rs.25,000/- by way of cheque 937903.  Thus the cheque number found in the copy of receipt Ex.B-3 was not in the original of the said receipt Ex.A-3.  Therefore it can safely concluded that Ex.B-3 copy of receipt  was tampered by opposite party by mentioning the cheque number in order to show that the complainant has paid the amount mentioned therein by way of cheque to submit their version. 

10. Therefore in view of the foregoing discussion and in view of the facts mentioned above it can safely concluded that the amounts paid under Exs.A-1 to A-3 receipts by the complainant were not credited by the opposite party to the account of non prized chit of complainant bearing No.PDL 02F-33.    Moreover, opposite party as already stated above tampered Ex.B-3 copy of Ex.A-3 by mentioning the cheque number and deliberately pressed into service.  Moreover, Ex.B-5 does not relate to the non prized chit and it relates to the prized chit.   Therefore the version of opposite party that on receipt of post dated cheque their collection agent issued three receipts Exs.B-3 to B-5 is baseless and has no legs to stand.   Therefore in view of the facts and circumstances of the case it can be safely concluded that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party and opposite party is also guilty of unfair trade practice.   Accordingly this issue is answered in favour of complainant and against the opposite party.

11.  POINT No.2:- Complainant claimed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards damages for the mental agony suffered by him.   The said amount claimed by complainant is imaginary and too high.     We feel that if an amount of Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards compensation it would meet the ends of justice besides directing the opposite party to give credit to the amounts mentioned in Exs.A-1 to A-3 receipts to the non prized chit and also to pay Rs.2,000/- toward costs.   Accordingly this point is answered.

12. In the result the complaint is allowed in part as indicated below:

1. The opposite party is hereby directed to give credit to the amounts paid by the complainant under Exs.A-1 to A-3 to the chit of the complainant bearing No.PDL 02F -33 and to issue a revised accounts slip thereof to the complainant. 
2. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the complainant towards compensation for the mental agony suffered by him.
3. The opposite party is further directed to pay RS.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the complainant towards costs of the complaint.

The above order shall be complied within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order failing which the amount ordered in item No.2 shall carry interest @9% p.a., till realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Junior Steno, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 2^nd day of November, 2011.   

       MEMBER                              MEMBER                              PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                  DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:        

For opposite parties :                 

                                                                                                                                                                                      PRESIDENT