IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA Monday the 29th day of February, 2016 Filed on 27.07.2012 Present 1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President) 2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) 3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member) in CC/No.262/2012 Between Complainant:- Opposite party:- Sri. Jayaprakash. P.K. M/s. Kerala State Financial Enterprises Yavanika, Vettuveni P.O. Ltd., Branch Loan Unit Haripad, Alappuzha Kumaran Asan Memorial Building (By Adv. Gayathri Devi) Alappuzha, Represented by its Manager (By Adv. P. Rajesh) O R D E R SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT) The case of the complainant is as follows:- The complainant was a subscriber of chitty No.81/08 with chital No.30 conducted by the opposite party. Complainant has bid the chitty in auction on 6.3.2009 for Rs.1,40,000/- and the price amount was realized by depositing the FD receipt for Rs.40,00/- which was being matured on 21.4.2010 and LIC policy certificate for Rs.5 lakhs with medi-claim. Thereafter the complainant was regularly remitting the monthly installments by the opposite party. However, there occurs default in remitting the monthly installments. On April, 2012 complainant approached the opposite party to remit the installments due. But he came to know that the opposite party has surrendered the LIC policy and appropriate the amount towards dues. The opposite party has surrendered the policy prematurely, thereby the complainant has suffered huge loss and money and other benefits. The premature surrender of LIC policy, without giving intimation to the complainant amounts to gross deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence the complaint is filed. 2. The version of the opposite party is as follows:- Complainant bid the chitty for Rs.1,40,000/- on 6.4.2009. The future liability of the chitty was Rs.1,90,000/-. For receiving price money, complainant offer two LIC policies with a sum assured Rs.1 lakh each. These LIC’s policies as on 7.4.2009 had a total surrender value of Rs.1,51,075/-. As per the request of the complainant, Rs.40,000/- was transferred to fixed deposit and was also made security for the future liability in the chitty. Thereafter complainant did not turn up. Opposite party has sent registered notice on 2.11.2009 and 18.1.2010 intimating the default of the chitty installments and also intimating the complainant that if the dues are not cleared LIC policies surrendered for realizing the chitty dues. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party has acted lawfully in accordance with terms and conditions of the chitty. 5. Complainant was examined as PW1. Opposite party was examined as RW1. Documents produced were marked Exts.B1 to B4. Ext.B1 is the true copy of the registered letter dated 18.1.2010 issued to the complainant. Ext.B2 is the true copy of the relevant page of the despatch register. Ext.B3 is the letter given by the complainant to the opposite party and Ext.B;4 is the true copy of the variola. 4. The points came up for considerations are:- 1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? 2) If so the reliefs and costs? 5. It is an admitted fact that the complainant bid the chitty for Rs.1,40,000/- on 6.4.2009. It is also an admitted fact that the prize amount was released by depositing the FD receipt for Rs.40,000/- which was being matured on 21.4.2010 and the 2 LIC policy certificate Nos. 390485415 and 780757888. According to the complainant the LIC policy certificate Nos. 390485415 and 780757888 had a surrender value for Rs.5 lakhs with medi-claim. According to the opposite party sum assured under this policies were Rs.1 lakh each. No copy of the policy certificates were produced in order to ascertain the value of the amount assured. According to the complainant on April, 2012 when he approached the opposite party to remit the installments due he came to know that the opposite party had surrendered the LIC policies and appropriated the amount towards dues. He further stated that the opposite party has surrendered the LIC policies without giving intimation to the complainant. This was totally denied by the opposite party. According to the opposite party they had sent registered notice on 18.1.2010 intimating the default of the chitty installments also intimate the complainant that if the dues are not cleared his LIC policies shall be surrendered or releasing the chitty dues. In order to substantiate this contention, the opposite party produced Ext.B1 the letter dated 18.1.2010 issued to the complainant. On verifying Ext.B1 we came to see that it was despatched on 23.1.2010 and the relevant page of the despatch register also produced which marked as Ext.B2. While cross examining the complainant to the question put by the learned counsel of the opposite party, But he admitted that opposite party had right to surrender the LIC policies. Exts.B1 and Ext.B2 proved that the said letter was issued to the complainant on 23.1.2010. The opposite party produced the true copy of the Variola which marked as Ext.B4. As per condition NO.18 C of the Variola, Ext.B4 proves that the opposite party has every right to surrender the LIC policies for releasing the chitty dues. Complainant has not taken any effort to prove the damage occurred by him. He has not claimed the statement of account from the opposite party. Apart from that there was no written protest from the part of the complainant while accepting the balance amount. From the foregoing discussions, we are of view that there is no merit in the complaint. In the result complaint is dismissed. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me in open Forum on this the 29th day of February, 2016. Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President) Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) Appendix:- Evidence of the complainant:- PW1 - Jayaprakash P.K. (Witness) Evidence of the opposite party :- RW1 - Suresh.S. (Witness) Ext.B1 - True copy of the registered letter dated 18.1.2010 issued to the complainant Ext.B2 - True copy of the relevant page of the despatch register Ext.B3 - Letter given by the complainant to the opposite party Ext.B4 - True copy of the variola // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Opposite parties /S.F. Typed by:- pr/- Compared by:- | 
