The case of the complainant is as follows. The complainant has subscribed one narukku kuri conducted by the respondents on 9.12.2002 vide passbook No.3. The said kuri had a total sala of Rs.50,000/- having 25 instalments of Rs.2000/- each. The complainant remitted 18 instalments and the last instalment was paid on 18.5.2004. The complainant had not received the amount even after the maturity in spite of repeated demands made by him. Hence the complaint. 

 

            2. The averments in the counter of 3rd respondent are that it is true that this respondent was a partner of the first respondent firm during its beginning. But he ceased to be a partner since 18.12.98 on which date the 3^rd respondent retired from the partnership firm by issuing a notice. As per the notice issued by this respondent the other partners allowed him to retire from the firm by settling all his accounts and continued the partnership firm with the remaining partners. After the above date this respondent never participated in any of the activities of the firm. So he is not at all liable for any claim of the complainant. This respondent is not aware whether the complainant had deposited any amount. No cause of action is made out against this respondent, as the complainant very well knew that this respondent was no longer a partner.   The complainant is not entitled for any amount from this respondent as he was not a partner of the firm. Hence dismiss the complaint.

             

            3. The 5^th respondent filed a counter to the effect that the complainant had never subscribed to any kuri conducted by the respondent and the complainant is not entitled to get any amount claimed and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

            4. The 7^th respondent has also stated in her counter that she is not a partner of the respondent firm and is in no way related to the respondent firm.

 

            5. The other respondents are called absent and set exparte.

 

            6. The points for consideration are:

(1)   Is there any deficiency in service on the part of respondents?

(2)   If so reliefs and costs.

 

           7. The evidence consists of Exts. P1 and P2 on the part of complainant and Exts. R1 to R3 on the part of 2^nd respondent. No oral evidence adduced by both.

 

            8. Points-1 & 2: The complainant’s case is that he has joined in a kuri conducted by the respondents vide passbook No.3. He had remitted 18 instalments in the said kuri at Rs.2000/- each. After 18 instalments the respondent firm is not worked properly.   So the complainant is entitled to get back the amount of Rs.50,000/-. The complainant approached the partners and demanded the amount paid in the kuri. But there was no remedy. There is no evidence brought by the respondents to show that they have released the amount to complainant. They have taken various contentions and 3rd respondent says that at the relevant period of transaction he was not a partner. He stated that since 18.12.1998 the 3^rd respondent retired from the partnership by issuing a notice. He produced Exts. R1 to R3 to substantiate his contention. Ext. R2 is the photostat copy of request made by 3^rd respondent to the managing partner of respondent firm. Ext. R3 is the photostat copy of a letter issued to the managing partner of the firm by the 3^rd respondent in which it is stated that he may be permitted to retire from the partnership. These letters are not sufficient to show that he was retired from partnership firm since 18.12.1998. What is the procedure adopted by the firm by accepting the letter of 3^rd respondent is not proved by 3^rd respondent. There is not at all any evidence to show that he was retired from the partnership firm on 18.12.98. Exts. R2 and R3 are only requests. So these documents cannot be taken as retirement letters.

 

            9. The 5^th and 7^th respondents filed separate counters by totally denying the averments in the complaint. All the respondents who are parties in the complaint are partners as per Ext. P2. There is nothing brought by the respondents to defeat the case of complainant. So the complaint is liable to be allowed.

 

            10. In the result, the complaint is allowed and all the respondents are directed to return the Ext. P1 amount with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of last payment till realization with costs Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the complainant within one month.

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 30^th day of November 2009.