Before the District Forum: Kurnool
Present: Sri K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President
And
Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member
Sri.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., Member
Friday the 30th day of July, 2004
C.D.No.100/2002
Smt. P.Vedavathi,
W/o. P.Srinivasulu,
D/o.No.1/77, Adoni Road,
Yemmiganur, Kurnool Dist.
. . . Complainants represented by his counsel
Sri Mohammed Ishaq.
-Vs-
The Branch Manager,
Shriram Chits Limited,
D.No.1/730, 1st Floor,
U.T.Y. Complex, Yemmiganur,
Kurnool Dist.
. . . Opposite party represented by his counsel Sri. P.Rmanjaneyulu
O R D E R
1. This consumer dispute case of the complainant is filed is under Sec.12 of the C.P.Act seeking a direction on the opposite party ot pay the balance amount of Rs.55,950/- along with interest at 24 percent P.A and Rs.10,000/- towards the mental agony and costs of this litigation as the opposite party committed deficiency of service in with holding the prize amount.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case are that she was the subscriber to the chit No.YLJ/6/21, YLJ5/45 each other Rs.50,000/- organized by the opposite party and she was regularly paying its monthly installments premiums at Rs.1000/- under each chit for 50 months. In view of the minority necessities, she has participated in the 22nd monthly actions held on 08.01.2002 and 10.12.2001 in chit No.s YLJ6/21 and YLJ5/45 for a discount of Rs.13,050/- and Rs.13,850/- respectively and to have the said prize amounts of Rs.36,950/- and 36,150/- she has furnished to the opposite party necessarily sureties and complied all the formalities to the opposite party and the opposite party even though accepted them, but did not pay the prize amount to the complainant and in spite of several requests, the opposite party issued a cheque for Rs.17,150/- only in favor of the complainant towards the supra stated out standings of Rs.73,100/-(i.e. 36,950+36,150/-) and did not pay the residuary balance amount in spite of several demands and on account of the said deficient conduct of the opposite party in not paying her, the due amounts the complainant suffered mental agony. The opposite party replied her, the due amounts the complainant suffered mental agony. The opposite party replied on 18.03.2002 to the demand notice of the complainant date.13.03.2002, with false averments as to the adjustment of prize amount by fabricating the documents containing the signatures of the complainant, to evade the liability.
3. In purchase of the receipt of the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite party has made its appearance in this matter through its counsel and contested the matter by filing denial written version questioning the maintainability of the complainant’s case both in facts and law and requiring the complainant to the strict proof of the complaint averments.
4. The written version of the opposite party even though admit the complaint as subscriber of the two chits alleged in the complaint, but alleged the complainant as late joiner of both chits by payment of necessary amounts minus dividends and admission of Rs.160/- under each chit. Even though it admits the complainant as successful bidder for the 22nd monthly action held on 10.12.2001, under the chit No.YLJ-5/45 for a prize amount of Rs.36.150/- for a discount of Rs.13,850/- and offered necessary sureties for the future liability of the residuary 28 monthly subscriptions the said amount was withheld under the complainant’s authorization letter date.28.02.2002, as the complainant offered her guarantee on the said amounts to the future liability of her husband chits bearing No.YSG8/6, YSG8/17 and YSJ6/8, in which he was the successful bidder and drawn the prize amount and the opposite party has adjusted from the said amount of Rs.36,150/- the amounts due from the complainant’s husband under the chit No.s YSG8/17 and YSJ6/8, under the receipt No.s 341450024125, 34150024126 and 341450024127 respectively. From the balance amount a further amount of Rs.2,738/- towards the monthly subscriptions of the complainant to the chit No. YLJ5/45 for the months of January, February, March, 2002 and Rs.260/- towards the documentation and verification charges was adjusted and for the residuary balance of Rs.13,640/- along with Rs.360/- towards incentive totaling to Rs.14,100/- a fixed deposit receipt was issued on the name of the complainant at her request and a lien on, it was kept at her instance for the complainant’s husband chit (NO.YSJ6/8) and ultimately the said lein was force closed on 15.11.2002 by adjustment of the said amounts towards defaulted monthly subscriptions of the chit NO.s YSJ6/8 of the complainant’s husband. As to the second chit prize amount of the complainant is concerned, it submits that as the complainant has created vide letter date.07.03.2002 a lien on the said amount to the chit of her husband’s after the adjustments of the February and March, 2002 monthly defaulted subscriptions of the complainant the said chit amounting to Rs.1,540/- and Rs.260/- towards the documentation and verification charges all totaling to Rs.19,800/- the residuary amount of Rs.17,150/- was paid to the complainant by cheque drawn on Rayalseema Grameena Bank, Yemmiganur and it was encashed by the complainant. Hence it submits no amount is due to the complainant as alleged and it denies any fabrication of the documents and alleges the case of the complainant as one to make the O.P not to demand the future subscription amounts of their chits. Hence for want of proper cause of action and any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and the case of the complainant being in suppression of the real facts of the case the fraudulent intention to have a wrongful gain, seeks the dismissal of the complaint, as the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs as prayed for.
5. While the complainant’s side in substantiation of her relied upon the documentary record in Ex.A1 to A9 besides to its sworn affidavit in re-iteration of its case, the opposite party’s side has made reliance on documentary record in Es.B1 to B18 besides to its sworn affidavit in re-iteration of its defense.
6. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out alleged deficiency of service of the opposite party towards her and her entitleness to the reliefs sought:-
- The Ex.A1 is the Xerox of the agreement of the chit as to the chit No.YLJ5/45 of the complainant. As there is no dispute as to the complainant’s status as subscriber of the said chit, it is not requiring any further appreciation as to the avidness of its terms, on complainant and the opposite party. The serial No.20 of the Ex.A1 terms and conditions obligations the prize subscriber to furnish security/surety for the due payment of the future subscription before to the drawl of the chit amount. The complainant alleges in her complaint that she furnished necessary sureties for enabling herself to drawl of the chit amount. The complainant alleges in her complaint that she furnished necessary sureties for enabling herself to draw the prize amount under the said two chits. The said face was not denied by the other side. She would have been entitled for the prize amount for the liability of her husband chits and the adjustment of the said amount in the letters defaultive conduct of its arrears and the future liability and the residuary balance payment to the complainant by cheque. Hence to evaluate the liability of the opposite party, if any, to the claim of the complainant is concerned the appreciation of the relevant material of the complainant’s side doesn’t drive to anywhere, except as to her subscriptions to the chit and the correspondence thereon.
8. The Ex.B1 is the letter date. 28.02.2002 said to have been addressed to the opposite party by the complainant. It requests the opposite party to cause deductions of all the dues of her husband's chit from the prize amount of her chits the above said material in Ex.B1 was not dis-credited by the complainant’s side except alleging is fabrication.
9. The chit No.s YSJ6/8, YSG8/17, and YSG 8/6 were admittedly of the complainant’s husband. Even though the complainant is silent as to any of her concerned to the chits, the Ex.B2 to B4 envisaged the lien created by the complainant on her chits No.s YSJ 5/45 and TLJ 6/21 to the liability of the above three chits of the complainant’s husband.
10. The letter date. 07.03.2002 in Ex.B5 said to have been addressed to the opposite party by the complainant also takes mention of the above three chits of the complainant’s husband and her no objection to credit the amounts due to her amount of her husband’s chits.
11. The fabrication of the document by the opposite party on the signed blank papers of the complainant as alleged by the complainant is not available to the complainant in this proceedings before this forum as that point cannot be adjudged in the summary proceedings before this forum.
12. The Ex.A2 Xerox of the surety/security for the chit No.YSJ6/8 of P.Sreenivasulu (Husband of the complainant) envisages him, as prized bidder, the later has furnished the surety of G.Govinda Rao, P.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy and B.Mallikarjuna towards his future liability, but it is not remaining sufficient to cover throw the lien the complainant has created vide Ex.B1 to B5 for the liability of her husband three chits.
13. As the factor of the fabrication on record in Ex.B1 to B5 cannot be decided in the summary proceedings before this forum with limited material and the opportunity to the parties to this proceedings, in the light of the above material the stand of the complainant as to their fabrication appear to be an afterthought evasive plea without substance to combat the material exhibits marked on the opposite party side.
14. The Ex.B6 contains two receipts each for ticket No.s 17, 8 and 6 under receipt of each for the tickets NO.45 and 21. Their perusal indicates part payment of the subscriptions of the chit premiums by P.Sreenivasulu husband of the complainant. As no record is filed, as to the payment of all installments of the subscriptions of the chit of Sreenivasulu, the Ex.B6 necessarily implies an indication a part payment of the subscription of the amount only by the said Sreenivasulu towards his liability.
15. The Ex.B7 is the promissory note executed on 15.10.2001 by P.Sreenivasulu and the complainant of this case B.Vedavathi infavor of the opposite party for Rs.14,000/- towards the future liability of 14 months installment premiums of the chit No.YAG 8/17. On the same date on 15.10.2001 there appears also an agreement of guarantee executed by the complainant of this case for the prized subscriber chit No.YSG8/17 of P.Sreenivasulu for the liability of Rs.14,000/-. The above two documents envisage the bonafides in the opposite party contentions as to the complainant and her undertaken liability to the chits of her husband P.Sreenivasulu.
16. In the same way, as the promissory and the exhibit of guarantee 31.01.2001 and 16.06.2001 covered in the Ex.B8 and B9 executed for the liability of Rs.48,000/- and Rs.18,000/- under the chit No.s YSJ 6/8 of P.Sreenivasulu also bears the signature of the complainant, there appears every bonafides in the contentions of the opposite party as to the complainant taking on her, the liability for the due subscriptions under the said chits and the default on the part of the complainant’s husband P.Sreenivasulu in making due payment of installment subscriptions under the chits to which he was the prized bidder as mentioned in Ex.B10 letter Date.12.10.2002 addressed by the opposite party to the complainant.
17. The certified copy of the cash voucher date.28.02.2002 and 07.03.2002 in Ex.B14 and B15 envisages the payment of Rs.36,150/- and Rs.36,950/- to the complainant as bid amount under the chit amounts YLJ 5/45 and YLJ 6/21 respectively. They bear the signatures of the complainant also in token of its receipt. The said fact is not dis-credited by the complainant’s side. The fact of the said payments evidenced above finds place in the Ex.B11 reply notice of the opposite party to the notice date.13.03.2002 of the complainant.
18. The Xerox of the debenture certificate of Sri Ram Chits, under the finance limited filed by the opposite party says of its issual in the name of the complainant and it shows an investment of Rs.15,620/- vide 14 debenture No.s 11250733211250746 for the 12 months period commencing from 11th March, 2002, lends support to the contentions of the opposite party side made its written version as to the mode of payment made to the complainant towards the chit amount. The fact in the above said material was not dis-credited by the complainant’s side.
19. The account copy extracts in Ex.B12 and B13 pertaining to ticket Nos. 45 and 21 of the complainant shows the account of amounts of subscriptions she made under the said chit ticket No.s. As no default of the subscriptions installments alleged on the part of the complainant by the opposite arty under the relevant chits of the complainant, they require no further appreciation than what they envisaged.
20. The B.16 to B18 reveals the account of ticket No.s 17,6 and 8 of P.Sreenivasulu husband of the complainant and the payment of subscription amount there under. They implies theory of the opposite party’s defense of their adjustment from the complainant’s amount in the absence of any substantial records envisaging the individual payment of all subscriptions installments of the chits by the said P.Sreenivasulu.
21. In the light of the above material what appears is that the opposite party has complied the instruction of the complainant in the adjustment of the complainant’s amount to the due amount of chits of herself and her husband too, which there was default in making the subscription amount regularly and the residuary due amount was paid to the complainant under cash vouchers and the debentures and there appears no deficiency of service of the opposite party to the complainant as to her chits.
22. Therefore, in conclusion of the above discussion, as there appears neither any bonafides and merits in the allegations of the complainant not any deficiency on the part of the opposite party making the latter liable for the claim made the complainant is not remaining entitled to any of the reliefs sought and hence the case of the complainant is dismissed with costs.
23. In the circumstances discussed above as the case of the complainant on the opposite party as is frivolous litigation an amount of Rs.2,000/- as awarded as exemplary costs to the opposite party from the complainant which the later has to comply within a month of the receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the dictation, corrected by us, and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 30th day of July, 2004.
MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite parties:- Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Agreement of chit dt.21.06.2001 executed between P.Vedavathi and Shriram Chits, Yemmiganur.
Ex.A2 Surety/Security proposal form of P.Sreenivasulu.
Ex.A3 Pass book of K.Lalitha chit No.YSG 5/25.
Ex.A4 Office copy of legal notice date. 13.03.2002 with postal issued by the complainant’s counsel.
Ex.A5 A.5 reply notice date 18.03.2002 issued by the opposite parties counsel.
Ex.A6 A6. Pass Book No.YLJ 5/45 of P.Vedavathi.
Ex.A7 Pass Book No.YLJ 6/21, of P.Vedavathi (complainant).
Ex.A8 Bunch of eight receipts of chits group No.YLJ 6.
Ex.A9 Bunch of seven receipts of chit group No.YLJ 5/45.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Letter date.28.02.2002 addressed by the complainant to opposite party.
Ex.B2 Letter date 21.06.2001 addressed by P.Vedavathi to the complainant.
Ex.B3 Letter date 15.10.2001 addressed by P.Vedavathi to the complainant
Ex.B4 Letter date 21.06.2001 addressed by P.Vedavathi to the complainant.
Ex.B5 Letter date 07.03.2003 addressed by the complainant to Opposite party.
Ex.B6 Bunch of eight receipts regarding to the payment.
Ex.B7 Promissory note date 15.10.2001 executed by P.Srinivasulu and
P.Vedavthi.
Ex.B8 Promissory note date 31.01.2001 of P.Sreenivasulu, G.Govinda Rao,
P.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, B.Mallikarjuna and P.Vedavathi.
Ex.B9 Promissory note date 16.06.2001 of P.Sreenivasulu, K.Lalitha and
P.Vedavathi.
Ex.B10 Letter date 12.10.2002 addressed by opposite party to the complainant.
Ex.B11 Xerox copy of reply date 18.0.2002 given by opposite parties counsel
To the complainants counsel
Ex.B12 Account copy Run date 15.11.2002 of P.Vedavathi Ticket No.45.
Ex.B13 Account copy Run date 15.11.2002 of P.Vedavathi Ticket No.21
Ex.B14 Certified copy of cash voucher issued by opposite party to P.Vedavathi for Rs.36,150/-
Ex.B15 Certified copy of cash voucher issued to P.Sreenivasulu for Rs.36,950/-
Ex.B16 Account copy of P.Sreenivasulu Ticket No.17.
Ex.B17 Account copy of P.Sreenivasulu Ticket No.6
Ex.B18 Account copy of P.Sreenivasulu, Ticket No.8.
MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
