By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:
The case of complainant in CC.311/10 is that the 1st respondent is a kuri company conducting by other respondents. The complainant joined a ticket in statement No.9 in the 9th day kuri conducted by respondents. The complainant had remitted 29 instalments till 9/7/07. He also joined in another ticket in account No.18 on a monthly instalment of Rs.2,000/-in the 4th day kuri conducted by respondents and remitted 22 instalments till 4/8/2007. He also joined in one laghu sambadhya padhathi in the name of his minor son Abhinand and remitted 28 instalments of Rs.300/- each. Altogether he remitted an amount of Rs.82,000/-. But no amount is returned so far. Lawyer notice was issued but no amount paid. Hence the complaint.
2. The counter averments of 2nd respondent are that this respondent is an unnecessary party in this complaint. This respondent is not the Chairman of 1st respondent company. This respondent is not aware of the kuri transaction. On 6/9/07 this respondent had retired from the respondent kuri company. There is no deficiency in service from this respondent. Hence dismiss.
3. Other respondents remained exparte.
4. The case of complainant in CC.312/10 is that the complainant joined in the laghu sambadhya padhadhi conducted by the respondents from 9/6/05. She remitted an amount of Rs.9,000/-. But no amount is returned so far. Hence the complaint.
5. The case of complainant in CC.313/10 is that the complainant joined in a ticket by statement No.90 on a monthly instalment of Rs.1,000/- in the 9th day kuri conducted by respondents and remitted 31 instalments. He also joined in another ticket in account No.15 on a monthly instalment of Rs.2,000/- in the 4th day kuri conducted by respondents from 4/11/05 and remitted 22 instalments. He also joined in the laghu sambadhya padhathi and remitted 28 instalments of Rs.300/- each. He also made 3 deposits of Rs.90,000/-, 50,000/- and Rs.37,000/- with the respondents. But no amount is returned so far. Lawyer notice was issued but of no remedy. Hence the complaint.
6. Counter averments of 2nd respondent are self same as in CC.311/12.
7. Points for consideration are that :
1) Whether there was any deficiency in service from respondents ?
2) If so reliefs and costs ?
8. Evidence consists of Exhibits P1 to P18 series.
9. All the complaints are filed against the respondents to get back the kuri amount and also to get back the deposit amounts with interest.
10. Exhibit P1 to P3 would show the remittance of amounts by complainant in CC.311/10. Likewise Exhibit P7 is the pass book of laghu sambadhya padhathi in which the complainant in CC.312/10 had remitted amounts. As per Exhibit P10 to P14 the complainant in CC.313/10 had remitted amounts with the respondents. It is the case of complainants that these amounts are not returned so far. The 2nd respondent filed his version in the three cases by stating that he is an unnecessary party in the complaints. According to him even if he was the Chairman he has resigned from the chairmanship on 6/9/07. But there is no evidence adduced to this effect. All the other respondents are remained exparte.
11. In the result all the complaints are allowed and the respondents are directed to return Exhibits P1 to P3, P7, P10 to P14 amounts to the concerned complainants with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of complaint along with costs Rs.500/- each to the complainants within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 30th day of May 2013.
