IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 30th day of June, 2011
Filed on 28.02.09
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.109/09
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Smt.Leena Antony, 1. M/s.Providence Chitty Fund,
Andisserry Veedu, Eramalloor.P.O., Cherthala.
Eramalloor.P.O.,
2. M/s.Providence Finance,
Eramalloor.P.O., Cherthala.
3. Sri.Thomas Antony,
Nalampurackal House,
Thuravoor.P.O., Cherthala,
Pin-688 532.
4. Smt.Joyse Antony,
-do-
5. Smt.Kathreena Augustine,
-do-
(By Adv.G.Priyadaesan Thampi)
6. Sri.Varghese Antony,
-do-
7. Sri.Willson Antony,
-do-
8. Sri.Sibi Augustine, -do-
9. Sri.Saji Augustine,
-do-
10. Sri.Sojan Augustine,
-do-
11. Smt.Sony,
-do-
(By Adv.G.Priyadaesan Thampi)
12. Smt.Mariyakkutty Varghese,
-do-
13. Smt.Lissy, D/o Antony,
-do-
14. Smt.Leena, D/o Antony
-do-
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
The complainants’ case is that the 1st & 2nd opposite parties are firms that carries out chitty and financial business in the name and style 'Providence Chitty Fund' and 'Providence Finance' respectively. The 3 to 6 opposite parties are the partners and 7 to 11 opposite parties are its administrators as well. The complainant subscribed a chitty carrying chital No.56 with the opposite parties in the chitty bearing chitty Nos.218 and remitted a total amount of Rs.36,250/-(Rupees thirty six thousand two hundred and fifty only) in 29 installments towards the same. Thus the complainant is entitled to an amount of Rs.36,250/-(Rupees thirty six thousand two hundred and fifty only) with interest from the opposite parties. The complainant had approached the opposite parties and demanded her money on a number of occasions, but to no avail. The opposite parties declined to hand back the amount the complainant remitted in the chitty. Since 9th December 2008, the opposite party firms stay put closed and stopped functioning. There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant sustained immeasurable mental agony. Aggrieved on this the complainant approached this Forum.
1. Notice was sent to the opposite prates. The 4, 5, 6, & 8 to 11 opposite parties alone turned up. The 4th and 6th opposite parties filed joint version. Similarly, 5 & 8 to 11 opposite parties filed version jointly. The other opposite parties did not appear or file version and they were set exparte. The forceful contention of the said opposite parties is that the complainant is not a consumer. The complaint is bad for mis-joinder of parties. According to the 4th and 6th opposite parties, they are not presently the partners of the opposite party firm. The opposite parties never received any amount from the complainant. They are absolutely unaware of the transactions if any with the complainant. The complainant is disentitled to any relief. The complaint is only to be dismissed with cost to the opposite parties.
2. The evidence of the complainant’s consists of the oral testimony of the complainant filed proof affidavit and the documents Al &A2 were marked.
3. Bearing in mind the contentions of the complaints the sole question arises for consideration is:-
Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief sought for?
4. We carefully perused the materials placed before us. We went through the Account books and the Pass book. The complainant’s case stands well-substantiated by the evidence put on record by the complainant. As we have already observed, the 4, 5, 6, & 8 to 11 opposite parties alone turned up and filed version. The forceful contention of the said opposite parties is that now they are not the partners of the firm. They retired from the partnership in 2007. It appears that the complainant subscribed the said chitty with the opposite parties in 2006. Therefore, the said contention of the opposite parties that they have nothing to do with the opposite party firm does not absolve them from their liability. Obviously, the contentions of the opposite parties do not inspire confidence in the mind of this Forum. The others do not make it a point to turn up before this Forum. Needless to say the case of the complainant stands unassailed. We hold that the complainant is entitled to the relief sought for.
In the result, the opposite parties are directed to pay the complainant an amount of Rs.36,250/-(Rupees thirty six thousand two hundred and fifty only) with interest @12% per annum from the date of the instant complaint viz.2lst February 2009 till its realization. The opposite parties are further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.l0,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant. The complainant is at liberty to recover the said amounts both from the movable and immovable assets of the 1 & 2 opposite party firms and the respective shares of the other opposite parties in the said firms. The opposite party shall comply with the order within 30 days of receipt of this order.
The complaint is allowed accordingly. No order as to cost.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of June, 2011.
Sd/-Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri. K. Anirudhan
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext. A1 - Original Pass Book in Chitty No.218
Ext.A2 - Letter of Authorization
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- k.x/-
Compared by:-
