By Smt.Sheena.V.V, Member:

          The complaint is filed to get back the amount remitted in the Kuri conducted by the respondents. The complainants had joined in the 9th day Poovalkuri vide statement Nos. 497-500 and 501-504. The kuri terminated on 9th November 2007. But the kuri amount Rs. 52,000/- for the first complainant and Rs. 40,000/-  for  the second complainant has been refunded. The complainants are entitled to get Rs. 1,00,000/- each. The complaint is filed for balance amount. Even though a lawyer notice was issued on 13th January 2009, there was no reply or remedy. Hence the complaint.

          2. The second respondent filed a version stating that he is not the chairman of the Kuri transactions between the complainant and the respondent firm. On 06/09/2007, he has  resigned from the chairmanship and the complainant is aware of it. According to him it is not correct that firm is closed. The 2nd respondent is not liable to pay any amount to the complainant. Hence dismiss the complaint.

          3. The counter averments furnished by the respondents 3,5,6 and 7 are that they have no consumer relation or dispute with the complainant. The respondent firm is still functioning. The complainant has defaulted the Kuri installments. So these respondents are not liable to pay any amount to the complaint. The respondent firm is only liable to pay any amount to the complainant. Hence dismiss the complaint.

          4. Respondents 9and 10 filed a joint version with the following averments. The complaint is not maintainable and filed without any bonafides. The respondents are not liable to make any payment to the complainant. These respondents are not the directors of the first respondent company, they are not in any way responsible for the liabilities of the company. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.

          5. The counter averments of 12th respondent is that the complaint is not maintainable against her either in law or facts. She has not received any amount or issued any deposit receipt to the petitioner and hence not liable to pay any amount. She had received lawyer notice and reply was given. She is not liable to pay the disputed amount and interest. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.

          6. The respondents 1,4,8 and 11 are called absent and set exparte.

          7. Points for consideration are that:-

          (1) Whether the complainants are entitled to realize the complaint amount from the respondents

?.

          (2) If so, relief’s and costs?

          8. The first complainant is examined as PW1 and exhibits P1toP7 marked.  9th respondent is examined as RW1 and Exhibit R1 marked. No evidence adduced by other respondents.

          9. Points:- The complaint filed to get back the balance amount of the Kuri conducted by the respondents. Both complainants had joined in the 9th day Pooval Kuri vide statement Nos. 497-500 and statement Nos. 501-504. They were remitting the instalments Rs. 2500/- from 09.11.1994 onwards. They have remitted entire instllments and the amount Rs. 52,000/- to the first complainant and Rs.40,000/- to the second complainant had returned. So, they filed the complaint to get the balance amount of Rs. 48,000/- for the first complainant and Rs. 60,000/- for the second complainant with 12% interest from 9.11.2007.The second respondent has stated that he has resigned from the post of chairman of the respondent firm and so he know nothing about the Kuri transaction between the complainants and the firm. All other respondents except R1,4,8 and 11 had also denied their liability to return any amount to the complainants. They have stated that the respondent firm is still functioning and the complainant has defaulted the kuri instalments.

          10. The first complainant is examined as PW1 and Exhibits P1to P7 marked. PW1 has deposed that, he has taken loan Rs.10,000/- from the respondents, that is seen from the Exhibit P1(a) document. And also he deposed that he has auctioned Exhibit P1 kuri. It will be seen by Exhibit P1 series documents. But both parties had not explained about the auction. As per Exhibit P1 series documents the date of auction had seen on 9.3.2007, i.e; only two instalments balance to terminate the Kuri. The Kuri was terminated on 9th November 2007. but there is no evidence has been produced from the respondents how much the auction amount. And there is no evidence produced by the respondent to prove that they are not liable to pay the amount to the complainant.

          11. In the result, the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay

Rs. 48,000/- to the first complainant and Rs.60,000/- to the second complainant with 9% interest from 9.11.2007 till realisation with costs  Rs.1,000/- within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 18th day of  February 2014.