Complaints filed on: 05-10-2019

                                                      Disposed on: 28-01-2022

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU

CC.No.168/2019

DATED THIS THE 28^th DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

PRESENT

SRI.KUMARA.N, B.Sc., LLB., PRESIDENT (I/c)

SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., LLB., LADY MEMBER

Complainants: -       

Sri.S.H.Siddalingaswamy

Since dead by his LRs

1. Smt Vanaja

W/o late S.H.Siddalingaswamy

Aged about 56 years

2. S.H.Dushyanth
19. /o late S.H.Siddalingaswamy

Aged about 34 years

3. S.H.Siddalinga Krupa

S/o late S.H.Siddalingaswamy

Aged about 32 years,

All are residing at

SAMPIGE village,

Dandinashivara hobli,

Turuvekere taluk,

Tumakuru district

(By Sri.G.K.Srinivasa, Advocate)

V/s

Opposite parties:-    

1. Sri Gowri Ganesha Chits Pvt. Ltd., No.307, 1^st Floor, 2^nd Main, 7^th Cross, Dommalur Layout, Bengaluru-560071

2. Sri Gowri Ganesha Chits Pvt. Ltd, Branch office: Red Cross Building, 1^st Floor, Church Circle, Ashoka Road, Tumakuru city

(OP Nos.1 & 2- by Sri.G.H.Kariyanna, Advocate)

ORDER

SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, LADY MEMBER

This complaint has filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to direct the Opposite Parties (hereinafter called as OPs) to pay chit amount a sum of Rs.3,25,000-00 pertains to ticket GFL (U) Tumakuru-03/26 and a sum of Rs.1,71,875-00 pertains to ticket GEL (4) Tumakuru-03/13 and Rs.5,00,000-00 towards mental harassment and torture with interest @18% p.a. to the complainants from the date of filing this complaint till its realization.  

2. The 1^st OP is running Chits business under the name and style of Sri Gowri Ganesh Chits Pvt. Ltd and having its head office at Bengaluru. The 2^nd OP is branch office of 1^st OP is having office at Tumakuru.  

3. It is the case of complainants that one Siddalingaswamy.S.H. who is the husband of complainant No.1 and father of complainant nos.2 and 3, during his life time the 2^nd OP had approached and requested to open chit transaction for a sum of Rs.5,00,000-00 with the 2^nd OP and remitted the amount to the 2^nd OP office and entered into chits with the OPs. While entering into the said chits and as per law Siddalingaswamy.S.H. had nominated his wife Smt.Vanaja who is the 1^st complainant. It is further case of complainants that the said Siddalingaswamy.S.H. entered into group ticket no.GFL (U) TMK-03/26 and GEL (4) TMK-03/2016 and ticket nos.26 and 13 respectively in the said groups. Unfortunately, the said H.S.Siddalingaswamy died on 26-5-2015 at Tumakuru. Thereafter, the 1^st complainant who is the nominee of above chits had approached the 2^nd OP and requested him to settle the chit amount. At that time, the 2^nd OP assured and ready to pay the same and requested her to continue the future installments and accordingly the amount entered in the pass book regularly and the 2^nd OP collected a sum of Rs.3,25,000-00 and entry was clearly disclosed in the pass book. Later the 1^st complainant had approached the 2^nd OP to issue all the necessary documents relating to the said chits and to refund the amount in her favour, but the 2^nd OP dodging the matter with one or the other reasons. On 2-9-2017 the 1^st complainant had given representation to the 2^nd OP and requested to settle the chit amount, but the 2^nd OP had collected all necessary documents from the 1^st complainant thereafter there was no answer from the 2^nd OP. The 1^st complainant again and again approached the 2^nd OP and requested to settle the chit amount but OPs did not chosen to comply the same hence, thereby the OPs have showed their negligent act and deficiency in service and caused breach the terms of business. On 2-12-2018 the complainants got issued a legal notice to OPs calling upon them to pay the amount covered under the chits. The said notice was duly served on the OPs and after receipt of notice the OPs have issued false and frivolous reply stating that they are not aware about the death of S.H.Siddalingaswamy and hence the OPs have sought for produce necessary documents and the complainants have submitted all necessary documents to the OPs. Even after submission of necessary documents, the OPs have not settled the matter and there is a deficiency of service on the part of OPs. Hence, the complainants have come up with this complaint.

4. After service of notice, OP Nos.1 and 2 have appeared through their learned counsel and filed common objections stating that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The complainants have suppressed the true facts and also complainants are not consumer and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The OPs further submitted that the complainants are not consumers and they have no right to approach this Hon’ble Commission seeking refund of amount paid by Siddalingaswamy.S.H, who is also not consumers. The grievances of complainants are of civil nature.  The nature of complaint is recovery of money and hence complaint is not maintainable before this Commission. The statements made by the complainants are false and there is no deficiency of service on the part of OPs. The OPs are not liable to pay any amount to the complainants. In the complaint, the complainants have not made the representatives of OPs and hence, the OPs have prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost.

5. The 2^nd complainant has filed his affidavit swearing himself and on behalf of complainant no.1 and 3 and produced thirteen documents marked as Exs.P1 to P13.

6. We have heard the oral arguments of learned counsel for complainants and apart from the oral arguments the learned counsel for complainant has submitted written arguments and points that would arise for determination as here under.

1. Whether the complainants are consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
2. Whether this Forum/Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
3. Whether the complainants prove the deficiency on the part of OPs?
4. Are complainants entitled for the reliefs sought for?

7. Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1: In the affirmative

Point No.2: In the affirmative  

Point No.3: In the affirmative  

Point No.4: Partly affirmative, as per final order

for the below

REASONS

8. Point No.1 to 4: The learned counsels for the OP Nos.1 and 2 have submitted that the complainants are not consumers and they have no right to approach this Hon’ble Commission/Forum seeking refund of amount paid by Siddalingaswamy.S.H, who was also not a consumer. The complaint is in nature of recovery of money and hence, the complaint is not maintainable before this Hon’ble Commission/Forum. In contrary the OPs have admitted that the deceased Siddalingaswamy.S.H was subscriber to the OPs and the complainant no.1 Smt.Vanaja is nominee of deceased Siddalingaswamy.S.H in Ex.P2. (reply notice of OPs to the complainant dated 18-12-2018).

9. This Hon’ble Commission has considered the some relevant decisions. The Hon’ble National Commission reported in Narinder Kumar and Others v/s Sanjiv Kumar [2001 CPJ 27 (NC)] wherein it was held that the Consumer Fora has jurisdiction in matters arising out of the Chit Fund Act. As per decision reported in 2004 (3) CPR 162, the subscribers or members of Chit Fund Company fell within the meaning of Consumer.

10. Section 2(1)(d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 explains;

 (b) “Complainant” means—

(i) a consumer; or

(ii) any voluntary consumer association registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or under any other law for the time being in force; or

(iii) the Central Government or any State Government; or

[(iv) one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest;]

[(v) in case of death of a consumer, his legal heir or representative;] who or which makes a complaint;

Hence, as per Section 2 (1) (b) (v) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the legal heirs of Siddalingaswamy.S.H, were have right to approach this Hon’ble Forum/Commission seeking relief/refund the amount paid by deceased Siddalingaswamy.S.H.

11. Though the OPs replied in Ex.P2, dated 18-12-2018 that the OPs have not any knowledge about the death of Siddalingaswamy.S.H. and the complainants have never approached the OPs for their Chit payment, the complainants produced the Ex-P5 and Ex-P8/requisition letters of complainants to OPs dated 5-9-2017, wherein said requisition letter served personally by the complainants to the 2^nd OP who is nominee in turn the 2^nd OP endorsed the said complainants request letter regarding the death of Siddalingaswamy.S.H. and settlement of the said chit fund amount and further forwarded to the 1^st OP which proves that the OPs have knowledge about the death of Siddalingaswamy.S.H., and the complainants approached the OPs for settlement of the said chit amount with necessary documents and further on perusal of the order sheet the OPs took two adjournments on 6-7-2021 and 17-8-2021 for settlement of the case out of the commission.

  12. The complainants produced Ex.P6 and Ex.P9 which proves that deceased Siddalingaswamy.S.H, entered into chits and had ticket (1) No.GFL (U) TMK-3/26 for Rs.3,25,000-00 and (2) GEL (4) TMK-03/2013 for Rs.1,71,875-00 and nominee is Vanaja. The complainants have produced Ex.P1/copy of legal notice issued to OPs dated 8-3-2019 and Ex-P3/receipt of RPAD which proves that the said notice duly served to OPs. The OPs though have served requisition letter/notice did not settle the said chit amount. The complainants prayed interest @18% p.a. on the chit amount from the date of complaint, but at present the bank rate of interest has come down as such the complainants are entitled interest @ 8% per annum. The OPs compelled the complainants to approach this commission, thereby they suffered mental agony and for that the OPs shall pay compensation of Rs.10,000-00 and litigation cost of Rs.10,000-00 and accordingly, we proceed to pass the following.

ORDER

The complaint is partly allowed with costs.

The OP Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.3,25,000-00 and Rs.1,71,875-00 pertains to ticket No.GFL (U) TMK-03/26 and ticket No.GEL (4) TMK-03/13 with interest @ 8% p.a  respectively from the date of filing of complaint till its realization.

It is further ordered that the OP Nos.1 and 2 are  jointly and severally shall liable to pay litigation cost of Rs.10,000=00 and compensation of Rs.10,000=00 to the complainants within 30 days from the date of this order. Failing which, it carries interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing complaint till the date of realization.

Furnish the copy of order to the complainants and opposite parties at free of cost.

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, corrected and then pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 28^th day of January, 2022).

LADY MEMBER                                         PRESIDENT (I/c)