By Sri.P.K.Sasi, President

  The case of the complainant is that he has joined in a 15th day Kairali Monthly kuri S76 with the opposite parties which was started on 15/07/2011 with a monthly installment of Rs. 1,000/- and 42 installments. He has joined in the kuri vide ticket No.119 and he has paid all the 42 installments without any default. .  Towards that kuri altogether in 42 installments the complainant has paid Rs. 42,000/- and after deducting the Foreman commission of Rs. 2,000 the complainant is entitled to get back Rs.40,000/- from the opposite parties

 

  2) He also joined in another kuri Amritha 2013 with monthly installment of Rs.5000/- and 21 installments. He has paid 15 installments. Altogether he had paid Rs. 75,000/- towards this kuri. Altogether in both kuries the complainant had paid Rs.1,15,000/-.

 

  3) When the complainant approached the 1st opposite party company to remit kuri installments he was told that the company has stopped all the kuries and they did not accept the monthly installment from the complainant. Hence the complainant has stopped all the transactions with the opposite party and demanded all those deposit amounts. The complainant approached the opposite parties on several occasions but they were not treated the complainant as a consumer and they behaved badly which caused severe mental agony and financial loss to the complainant. By stopping the functioning of the company without settling the kuri transactions, amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on their part towards the complainant. Altogether the complainant is entitled to get Rs.1,15,000/- from the opposite parties. Hence a lawyer notice was issued on 12/01/2016. Even after accepting the notice no relief received hence this complaint is filed for getting relief. 

 

  4) On receiving notice all the opposite parties entered appearance through counsel. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 5th opposite parties appeared through one counsel and filed a common version. In their version it is stated that as per the Articles of Association of the 1st opposite party company it is the 4th opposite party who is the authorized person to look after all the day to day affairs of the company. Being the Managing Director the 4th opposite party was conducting and managing all the affairs for the company. The opposite parties are not denied the kuri joined by the complainant. They denied that the complainant has demanded the kuri amount from these opposite parties. Regarding the fixed deposits made by the complainant these opposite parties neither denied nor admitted, they only submitted that everything was done by the 4th opposite party Managing Director. These opposite parties further submitted that it is found out by the internal auditor that the 4th opposite party has committed so many misappropriations and financial mis-managements in the company which may extend up to Rupees Thirteen crores. All those amounts were utilized by the 4th opposite party for his own purpose and it was enjoyed by him alone. Based on that, the 2nd opposite party has submitted complaint before all the concerned authorities and Chelakkara Police has Registered a crime vide No.205/15 against the 4th opposite party. 

 

  5) They further submitted that a proper reply was sent to the lawyer notice issued by the complainant. According to these opposite parties the complainant is not entitled to get any amounts from the 1st opposite party company as prayed in the complaint. They further submitted that they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice towards the complainant. 

 

  6) The 4th opposite party who is appeared through a separate counsel and filed separate version. He denied that the complainant is a consumer of the 1st opposite party. He also denied the averments stated in the complaint that the 2nd to 5th opposite parties are responsible for the day today affairs of the company and the company was functioning through them also. According to him the 2nd, 3rd & 5th opposite parties are the persons who were conducting the day today affairs of the company. This opposite party further stated that it is not known to him that whether the complainant has joined in a kuri as stated in the complaint or not. He also denied that the complainant has asked him to return the kuri amount. The 4th opposite party in his version denied that he has not induced anybody to join in a kuri  with the 1st opposite party company. The 4th opposite party further stated in his version that only the 2nd, 3rd, & 5th opposite parties are responsible for all the day to day affairs of the company and they were used to collect blank receipts, signed papers from the customers. It is further submitted that when an conflict between the 4th opposite party and the other opposite parties in connection with the day today affairs of the 1st opposite party company occurred, the 4th opposite party has filed a suit before the Vadakkanchery Munsiff court vide OS 15/2015. The 4th opposite party further stated that he is not committed any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice towards the complainant and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with cost.

 

  7) Then the case was posted for complainant’s evidence and the points for consideration is that

  1) whether there was any deficiency in service or unfair 

      trade practice happened on the part of opposite  

      parties ?

  2) If so, what cost and relief ?

 

  8) From the side of complainant he has appeared before the Forum and filed detailed affidavit in which he has affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. He also produced 6 documents which are marked as Ext. P1 to P6. Ext. P1 15th day Kairali kuri passbook ticket No.119; Ext. P2 is the receipt; Ext. P3 another receipt; Ext. P4 Lawyer Notice dtd. 05/01/2016; Ext. P5 series (5 Nos) Postal Receipts and Ext. P6 series (5 Nos.) A/D Cards.

 

  9) From the side of 4th opposite party he has appeared before the Forum and submitted counter proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and explained all the contentions raised in the version in detail. One documents produced from the side of 4th opposite party which is marked as Ext. R1. Ext. R1 is the copy of plaint filed before Wadakkanchery Munciff Court. The other opposite parties neither filed any counter proof affidavit nor adduced any evidence. The complainant and the 4th opposite party filed argument notes and we heard in detail. 

 

  10) Here the opposite parties are in two groups. The group of 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 5th opposite parties says that all the day to day affairs of the company was looked after by the 4th opposite party who was the Managing Director of the company. They also submitted that it was found out that the 4th opposite party has conducted severe misappropriations of funds in the company and that was found out in the Internal Audit Report. Whereas the 4th opposite party says that the 2nd opposite party Chairman and 3rd & 5th opposite parties were conducted the day to day affairs of the company and the 4th opposite party was included in the Director’s list as Managing Director for the name sake only. There was no direct involvement for him in any day to day affairs of the company. 

 

  11) We have gone through the contents of affidavit filed and the documents produced from the side of complainant and other opposite parties. Ext. P1 would go to show that the complainant has joined in 15th day Kairali 2011 kuri vide chit No. 119 and he has paid 42 installments of Rs.1,000/-. Ext. P2 & P3 receipts are the only proof produced by the complainant to prove subscription in Amritha 2013. That cannot be considered as a conclusive proof for that.  Hence we are of the opinion that complainant could not prove the alleged payment of 15 installments in Amritha 2013 chitty. There is no contra evidence adduced from the side of opposite parties. Considering all these points discussed hereinabove we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get half of the claims made in the complaint. Without returning that amount the opposite parties had committed deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice towards the complainant. The 1st opposite party being a private limited company only the company can be held liable.

 

  In the result, we allow this complaint and the 1st opposite party company is  directed to return Rs. 40,000/- with 14% interest from 15/12/14 onwards in 20th day Kairali 2011 kuri to the  complainant within  one month from receiving copy of this order. Since the complainant is sufficiently compensated with interest no separate compensation is ordered. Failing which, the complainant is entitled to get 9% interest for all those amounts till realization.

 

    Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the     31st day of October 2017.