By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:
The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
The Complainant was a subscriber of the chit in ticket No.10 run by the Opposite Party. The period of chit was in between 26.4.2000 and 26.4.2002 the Complainant auctioned the chitty for an amount of Rs.3,75,000/- on 15.2.2001. While the amount was issued the Complainant had to deposit the title deed of the land property as a security.
2. The chit amount liable to be closed by the Complainant was remitted in lumpsum of Rs.2,25,000/- on 26.11.2002 and no amount was due from the Complainant towards the payment of the chit.
3. The Complainant requested the Opposite party to give back the title deed which was kept in security. Whereas the Opposite Party opted one or other reason for not returning the document that was kept as security. When the Opposite party failed to return the title deed deposited as a security a lawyer notice dated 21.2.2009 was sent to the Opposite Party. At the same instance the Opposite Party issued a lawyer notice dated 21.2.2009 under N.I Act 138 for the dishonour of cheque numbered 093121 dated 31.1.2009 for Rs.1,13,990/-. The Complainant's husband has given that cheque as a security in chit No.GTY 41 ticket No. 7 and the same chit in the name of Complainant's husband was closed on 11.1.2007. The cheque given as security was mis utilized to extract more money from the Complainant. The receipt for the entire payment was given by the Opposite Party and taking a twist in turn to derive excess money is a deficiency in service. The Opposite Party may be directed to return the title deed 19495 to the Complainant and also to direct the Opposite Party to pay Rs.50,000/- towards the damages of the Complainant for the mental pain and sufferings.
4. The Opposite Party filed version in short it is as follows:- It is admitted by the Opposite Party that the Complainant was a subscriber in the chit run by the Opposite Party and it was auctioned for an amount of Rs.3,75,000/- by the Complainant. The title deed deposited as a security towards the chit of GTY 41/7 of Complainants husband was also deposited as a security of the chit of the Complainant too. The Complainant remitted Rs.2,25,000/- on 26.11.2002 the Complainant and her husband had not so far cleared the liability of the amount that to be remitted for the closing of the chit. Rs.1,32,461/- was due amount from the Complainant till 27.8.2006.
5. The chit auctioned by the Complainant No.GO 239/10 was auctioned by the Complainant. Towards the amount due from the Complainant the cheque was issued to the Opposite Party. Later the cheque issued towards the liability was dishonoured and the case is filed against the Complainant in JFCM 1 Sulthan Bathery. The delivery of the title deed deposited cannot be effected so long as the amount is due from the Complainant and her husband. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost.
6. The points in consideration are:-
Whether any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party in the chit transaction?
Relief and cost.
7. Points No.1 and 2:- The Complainant filed proof affidavit, Exts. A1 to A8 and X1 are the document considered and also the oral testimony of the Complainant as PW1. The Opposite Party has not tendered any evidence in this case.
8. The case of the Complainant is that the chit of the Complainant was bid in favour for Rs.3,75,000/- and the amount was paid to the Complainant on 15.2.2001. The value of the chit was Rs. 5,00,000/- admittedly the title deed of the land property was kept in security that too is entered in the documents produced. The documents produced by the Complainant are the certified copy of the different pages of the chit pass book. Ext.A1 the page No.40 of the certified copy of the pass book. Therein it is also seen that the liability of the Complainant with the
Opposite Party is not endorsed as closed. The amount in lumpsum Rs.2,25,000/- was remitted by the Complainant on 26.11.2002. In this page balance Rs.33,100/- is also seen written. The contention of the Complainant is that the amount in lumpsum in Rs.2,25,000/- was remitted towards the closing of the liability and the property which is kept as security is not released to the Complainant on payment of the entire liable amount. Though the Complainant is having plea that the liability of the Complainant to the closing of the chit amount is made absolute in payment but no document is produced to establish that contention. The Complainant is examined as PW1. In the oral testimony of the Complainant it is deposed that as per documents Ext.X1 Rs.33,206/- is the balance amount. The issuance of the cheque according to the Complainant is towards the security of the chit of her husband. It is pertinent to note that the chit became mature in 2002 how ever lawyer notice was sent to the Opposite Party in 2009. The Complainant in this case could not brought out in evidence to substantiate that the Complainants liability towards the chit was closed and withholding of the title deed if it was kept as a security to the chit of the Complainant alone it was deliberately not released to the Complainant. The Opposite Party is not required to releasing the security of the title deed if the liability is not closed. In this circumstance the non delivery of the title deed to the Complainant cannot be considered as a deficiency in service and the point is found accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed no order as to cost.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 31st December 2010.
Date of filing: 27.07.2010.
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
A P P E N D I X
Witness for the Complainant:
PW1. Jessy. C.V Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
Nil.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Copy of Pass Book (2 Page).
A2. Copy of Receipt. dt:26.11.2002.
A3. Copy of Letter. dt:21.02.2009.
A4. Copy of Postal Receipt. dt:27.02.2009.
A5. Copy of Acknowledgement.
A6. Copy of Pass Book.
A7. Copy of Pass Book.
A8. Copy of Pass Book (Page No.44).
X1. Copy of Register (Page No.217)
Exhibits for the Opposite Party:
Nil.
