Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/456/2012

S. THILAKAVATHY - Complainant(s)

Versus

SRI RAM TAMILNADU CHITS LTD., THE BRANCH MANAGER - Opp.Party(s)

N. JAYAKUMAR

02 Jul 2015

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CHENNAI

BEFORE :   THIRU.A.K.ANNAMALAI                           PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

                                                      TMT.P.BAKIYAVATHI                               MEMBER                                                                                 

F.A.NO.456/2012

(Against the order in CC.No.50/2010, dated 24.05.2011 on the file of DCDRF, Tiruvarur)

DATED THIS THE 2^nd DAY OF JULY 2015

S.Thilakavathy,

W/o.Selvaraj,

3/379, Arichandrapuram,

Vadapathimangalam Post,                                              M/s.N.Jayakumar

Nidamangalam Taluk,                                        Counsel for Appellant / Complainant

Thiruvarur District.

-vs-

1.The Branch Manager,

   Sri Ram Tamilnadu Chits Ltd,                                 M/s.K.V.Ananthakrishnan

   Thiruvarur.                                                     Counsel for 1^st Respondent/1^st OP

 

2. The Regional Manager,

    Sri Ram Tamilnadu Chits Ltd,

    Sri Tower, Madurai Road.                                2^nd  and 3^rd Respondents /2^nd  and 3^rd 

    Trichy-8.                                                                                opposite party

                                                                                   Served called absent

3. The Manager,

    Sri Ram City Union Finance Ltd,

    No.221, Royapettah High Road,

    Mylapore, Chennai.

          The appellant is the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying certain relief.  The District Forum dismissed the complaint.  Against the said order, the appellant / complainant filed this appeal praying for to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.50/2010, dated 24.05.2011.    

          This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 09.06.2015, upon hearing the arguments on both sides, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order.

A.K.ANNAMALAI,  PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

          The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant.

2.       The complainant joined chit group for the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- by paying Rs.6000/- per month on the assurance after paying 2 instalments she could bid for Rs.3,00,000/- and accordingly they obtained various signatures from her and also she had taken a policy for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- in the name of her son Venkatesh, for which she had provided 15 State Bank of India cheques and 10 Mercantile Bank Cheques after receiving Rs.10,000/- and the policy was issued in her son’s name on 23.10.2009 and the opposite party indulged in unfair trade practice by creating forged documents and on 12.08.2010, she had participated in the bidding and the bid was made for Rs.2,10,000/- for which the 1^st opposite party demanded for the production of 3 government employees as sureties but not paid the amount.  Hence she issued legal notice and no reply was received and thereby consumer complaint came to be filed directing the opposite parties to pay chit amount after accepting the sureties offered by her, to furnish information on what basis loan was extended and to which business and to furnish information as to how much amount would be given after maturity of policy which stands in the name of her son Venkatesh and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and pain and to pay costs.

3.       The opposite parties denied the allegations and contended that she had obtained loan for the purpose of house establishment and after knowing the terms and conditions only submitted loan application for the same she had presented cheques for payment of installments and had taken policy by her son on his own accord and being a Village Administrative Officer.  By creating lien in the chit the complainant had obtained loan for house establishment for which she had given requisition also.  The complainant and her husband joined in the chit groups and committed default in payment.  Hence the opposite party preferred complaint against him before Registrar of Chits for which EP was filed and enquiry is pending.  Since the complainant is having loan by creating lien in the chit group and she was instructed to obtain chit amount by producing sureties as per chit rules.  The Consumer Protection Act cannot be applicable with the chit group cases as per the ruling of Hon’ble Supreme Court and liable to be dismissed.

4.       Based on the both sides materials and after an enquiry the District Forum came to the conclusion that the District Forum have no jurisdiction to entertain the matters involved the management of Chit business as per Sec. 64 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 and only to refer the matter to Registrar of Chits.  Apart from this observation the District Forum dismissed the complaint on merits which is disputed by the appellant.

5.       We have heard both sides arguments and carefully considered the records.  It is the admitted case of both sides that the complainant had joined the Chit groups of the opposite parties and also availed loan by filing separate loan application and the opposite parties have contended that she had created lien over for the chit amount have obtained housing establishment and the hit amount of Rs.2,10,000/- was not disbursed for various reasons alleged that she had not produced solvencies as already having lien over the chit amount for the earlier loan obtained and these are all not disputed by the complainant.   In these circumstances the District Forum though held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the case, also gone through the merits of the case and dismissed the case which is disputed by the complainant stating that it ought not to have discussed the merits of the case.  Because of it, it is not mandate for the District Forum to allow the complaint otherwise.  Hence in view of the provisions under Sec.64 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 and the matters relating to the management of chits and administration are to be decided by the Registrar of Chits and in those circumstances we find no merits in this appeal and thereby this appeal deserves to be dismissed as devoid of merits and accordingly

          In the result, the appeal is dismissed by confirming the order of the District Forum.  However with a liberty to the appellant to approach the appropriate forum if so desired in this regard.

          There is no order as to costs in the appeal.

 

P.BAKIYAVATHI                                                               A.K.ANNAMALAI

   MEMBER                                                        PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

INDEX; YES / NO

VL/D/PJM/CHITS