D.o.F:22/1/09D.o.O:2/7/09 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD CC.18/09 Dated this, the 2nd day of July 2009. PRESENT SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER SMT.P.P.SYAMALADEVI : MEMBER T.P.Preetha, W/o K.V.Manoj, Saphalya Vellikoth, Ajanur, Hosdurg : Complainant (M.Ranjith,Adv,Hosdurg) 1 President,Pudukkai Vainingattu Sree Vairajathan Eashwaran Kshethram Puthukai : Vainingattu, Po.Uppilikkai,Hosdurg 2. C.V.Krishnan, Treasurer, : Opposite parties R/at Puthukai.Po, Kasaragod. 3.. V.Balachandran, Secretary, Pudukkai Vainingattu Sree Vairajathan Eashwarante Kshethram Puthukai Po Uppilikkai, Kasaragod. (E.Sukumaran, Hosdurg,Adv. for OP.NO.2 ) ORDER SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ: PRESIDENT: Pruned off other averments and allegations the complaint is that: complainant Preetha.T.P joined in the chitty conducted by opposite parties 1 to 3 on 13/06/05. The total chitty amount on maturity to be received was Rs.50,000/-. Complainant paid 22 monthly chitty installments of Rs.1000/- each till 16/3/07totalling Rs.22000/-. Before maturity of the chitty the opposite parties collected huge amount from various chittalans and after misappropriating the amount closed the chitty offices. Hence alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties this complaint is preferred. 2. Notice to all opposite parties were issued. Notice to Opposite parties 1&3 returned as unserved for the reason ‘left’. Hence publication of notice against opposite parties 1&3 was ordered and even after publication of notice opposite parties 1&3 remained absent. Hence they were set exparte. 2nd opposite party appeared and filed version denying all the contentions of the complainant as well as the liability cast upon him. According to opposite party No.2, opposite parties have not conducted any chitty business . The passbook produced by the complainant is created for the case. The opposite parties Pudukai Vainingat Sree Vairajathan Easwaran Kshethra Committee is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act and 2nd opposite party is the treasurer of the committee. The said committee decided to construct a Maha kshetram of the deity Shri Vairajathan Easwaran along with a Kalyan Mandapam, old age home and school building . The cost estimated for the said construction was Rs. Ten crores/- . It is decided by the opposite parties committee to raise the said amount by way of donations and collections from devotees and public. For the convenience of the devotees and public the committee opened day deposit and SB account in various financial institutions. Accordingly they made deposits. In the meanwhile the committee faced some financial straits due to the payment of income tax. Some donators demanded return of donations given for constructions and adopted dubious methods to get back the said amount lying in various banks in the name of opposite parties committee. The opposite parties committee being a donatory is not liable to return the donations. The relief sought is against opposite parties is opposed to the provisions of societies registration Act and the rules and regulations of the opposite parties committee. As per the registered bye law opposite parties committee President alone is having power to represent the committee. The secretary has no right to represent the committee. There is no privity of contract between the parties which could be enforced in law as per the provisions of the prize chits and money circulation (Banning) Act 1978 on the one hand and on the other hand it is opposed to public policy. The 2nd opposite party being the treasurer of the society is not liable to be sued for recovery of the amount allegedly due by the society. The 2nd opposite party is an unnecessary party. Hence the complaint is a defective for misjoinder of parties and hence liable to be dismissed. 3. Complainant filed affidavit in support of her claim reiterating what is stated in the complaint. The passbook issued bearing the seal of opposite parties committee is produced and marked as Ext.A1. Opposite party No.2 filed counter affidavit and no documents produced . Both sides heard and the documents produced. 4. As against the allegations made by the complainant the opposite party No.2 has not produced any documents to substantiate his contentions. 5. Ext.A1 produced by the complainant is apparently a chitty passbook. If it is a concocted one for the purpose of filing the complaint and extort money from the opposite parties as alleged by the 2nd opposite party, then of course opposite parties should have resorted appropriate legal proceedings against complainant for creating such false document. But no such proceedings are seen initiated by opposite parties. 6. The registered bye law of the opposite parties society, the details of SB accounts opened in the Financial Institutions, the details of payment made as income tax the books of account of the committee etc are not produced to prove the veracity of the contention of the 2nd opposite party. In the absence of such documents it can safely conclude that Ext.A1 is a chitty passbook issued by opposite parties to the complainant as part of their chitty transactions. 7. The non completion of chitty and the appropriation of chitty instalments are deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. It became more grave when the chitty run by the opposite parties do not have the required license from the authorities to conduct the same. This is nothing but an unscrupulous exploitation of consumers. Therefore the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs.22,000/- with interest @9% from the date of complaint till payment along with a cost of Rs.3000/-. Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENTExt.A1- Chitty passbook eva/
......................K.T.Sidhiq
......................P.P.Shymaladevi
......................P.Ramadevi | | 
