BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri. K.V.H.Prasad B.A.LL.B., President
And
Smt. C.Preethi, M.A.LL.B., Lady Member
Wednesday the 17th day of October, 2007
C.C.No.68/07
N. Krishnoji Rao, S/o. N. Narsoji Rao,Working as a
S.D.O.P in Telecom Department, Kurnool.
…Complainant
Versus
The Branch Manager, Shriram Chits Private Limited,
D.No. 40/384, Plot No. 8 to 34, IInd Floor, U Con Plaza, Park Road,
Kurnool.
… Opposite Party
This complaint coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.Challa Sudhakar Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool, for complainant, and Sri.B.V.Ramana Reddy, and Sri. S.V.Krishna Reddy, Avocate, Kurnool opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
ORDER
(As per Smt. C. Preethi, Member)
C.C.No. 68/07
1. This consumer complaint of the complainant is filed U/S 11 and 12 of C.P.Act 1986, seeking a direction on opposite parties to repay an amount of Rs.5,000/- with interest, Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony
Rs. 40,000/- for deficiency of service and any other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainants case is that the complainant was a guarantor for one V. Rama Devi who was a successful bidder in chit auction held on 14.5.1999 and the said Ramadevi became defaulter and a suit was filed in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool, in O.S.No. 177/01 for recovery of Rs.45,872/- and suit was decreed accordingly. As per court proceedings an amount of Rs.1,540/- per month was deducted from the complainants salary from May 2005 to June 2006 and Rs.1,753/- in July 2006 and remitted to the Principal Junior Civil Judge Court under E.P.No. 38/2005 in O.S.No. 177/01, totally Rs.23,313/-. For early clearance on 25.3.2006 the complainant paid Rs.5,000/- by hand extra in addition to the deducted amount to opposite party vide receipt bearing No. 337950 / 105283. The complainant in this case seeks for repayment of said Rs.5,000/- paid by hand as the opposite party already received the decreed amount of Rs.23,313/- deducted from his salary, but the opposite parties did not pay the said amount, the complainant got issued legal notice dated 19.4.2007 but there is no response. Hence, resorted to the forum for redressal.
3. In support of their case the complainant relied on the following documents viz., (1) certified copy of Judgement in O.S.No. 117/01 of Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Kurnool , (2) certified copy of salary attachment Order addressed to Accounts Officer, G.M.T , Kurnool as to the salary of complainant , (3) letter dated 10.4.2007 of Accounts Officer General Manager, Telecom District , Kurnool ,(4) receipt dated 25.3.2006 for Rs.5,000/- and (5) office copy of legal notice dated 19.4.2007 along with acknowledgements and postal receipts, besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant in reiteration of his complaint avernments and the above documents are marked as Ex.A1 to A5 for its appreciation in this case. The complainant caused interrogatories to the opposite party and replied to the interrogatories of opposite party.
4. In pursuance to the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant the opposite party appeared through their counsel and contested the case by filling written version.
5. The written version of opposite parties admits that one Smt. V.Ramadevi joined as chit member for chit worth Rs.50,000/- and became a successful bidder, for drawing the prize amount the said V. Ramadevi produced 4 guarantors (defendants 2 to 4 in suit No.117/2001 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool). The said Ramadevi committed default after paying 11 installments and for recovery of balance future installments a suit was filed against the complainant and other four defendants and suit was decreed for sum of Rs.45,872/- with interest and cost. The E.P.No. 38/2005 was filled by opposite party for attachment of salaries of defendants 2 to 4 for E.P. amount of Rs.69,939/-. A sum of Rs.34,655/- as recovered by way of attachment of salary of D3 and D4 and no amount was recovered from D2’s salary. Subsequently a sum of Rs.5,000/- was paid by the complainant. After payment of said Rs.5,000/- still a sum of Rs.18,746,/- is liable to be recovered from the defendants. As such the opposite parties got every right to receive the amounts from any of the guarantors and said amount paid by the complainant is only towards legal and subsisting liability. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on part of opposite parties and seeks for the dismissal of complaint with costs.
6. In support of their case the opposite parties relied on the following documents viz., (1) certified copy of agreement of chit, (2) certified copy of guaranty , (3) certified copy of promissory note , (4) certified copy of E.P.No 38/05 and (5) certified copy of P.S memo along with certified copy of docket order in E.P.No.38/05, besides to the sworn affidavit of opposite party in reiteration of his written version avernments and the above documents are marked as Ex.B1 to B5 for its appreciation in this case. The opposite party caused interrogatories to the complainant and replied to the interrogatories of complainant.
7. Hence, the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitled alleging deficiency of service ?.
8. It is the case of the complainant that he stood as a guarantor to one
V. Rama Devi, who was a successful bidder in opposite party chit fund company and there after became a defaulter and a suit was filed for recovery of due installments and it was decreed vide Ex.A1 and vide Ex.A2 a salary attachment order was addressed to the Accounts Officer G.M.T.kurnool, requiring him to withhold Rs.23,313/- from the JD r3 / complainant in monthly installments . In pursuance to the order in Ex.A2, an amount of Rs.1,540/- per month was recovered from the salary of the complainant from May 2005 to June 2006 and Rs.1,753/- in July 2006 and remitted the same to the Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Kurnool under E.P.No. 38/2005 in O.S.No. 177/2001 totaling Rs.23,313/- as envisaged in Ex.A3 dated 10.4.2007.
9. The Ex.A4 is the receipt dated 25.3.2006 of opposite party issued to the complainant as to the receipt of Rs.5,000/- from the complainant. The complainant in this case alleged that he paid the said Rs.5,000/- by hand, on 25.3.2006 for early clearance of attachment order. But opposite parties after receipt of said amount of Rs.5,000/- from the complainant, recovered the full attachment order amount of Rs.23,313/- from his salary. Hence, got issued legal notice vide Ex.A5 dated 19.4.2007 to return the amount of Rs.5,000/- which is excess to the recovery amount of Rs.23.313/-, as already recovered from the salary of the complainant. But the opposite parties on the other hand pleaded that the liability on the defendants is jointly and severally and they have every right to receive the amounts from any of the guarantors. The plea taken by opposite party is not substantiate by any piece of evidence or documents. Hence, when the plea is not substantiated it cannot relied upon.
10. From the Ex.A2 it is clear that salary attachment order was for Rs.23,313/- only and vide Ex.A3 it is clear that said attachment order for Rs.23,313/- was complied and remitted to Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool. From the perusal of Ex.A4 it shows that Rs.5,000/- was paid by the complainant to the opposite party on 25.3.2006,the last recovery from the complainants salary was in July, 2006, hence, it is clear from the above that the complainant was intended for early clearance of his attachment order and when it is not done, there appears deficiency of service on part of opposite party for withholding said amount. The said payment of Rs.5,000/- by complainant vide Ex.A4 is excess to the attachment order vide Ex.A2, as the attachment order was complied vide Ex.A3, the said amount received under Ex.A4 is remaining excess has to be returned to the complainant. As the opposite parties driven the complainant to the forum for redressal, the opposite party is liable to pay costs of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.
11. In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to pay to the complainant Rs.5,000/- with 9% interest per annum from 25.3.2006 till realization along with costs of Rs.2,000/- within a month of receipt of this order. In default the opposite party shall pay the supra award amount with 12% interest per annum from the date of default till realization.
A
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced in the open bench this day 17th October, 2007.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant :Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1. Certified copy of Judgment in O.S.No.177/2001
Of Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Kurnool.
Ex.A2. Certified copy of salary attachment order addressed
to Accounts Officer, G.M.T Kurnool as to the salary
Of complainant.
Ex.A3. Letter, dated 10.4.2007 of Accounts Officer,
General Manager, Telecom District , Kurnool.
Ex.A4. Receipt, dated 25.3.2006 for Rs.5,000/- from
N. Krishnoji Rao.
Ex.A5. Office copy of legal notice, dated 19.4.2007
along with acknowledgements postal receipts.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. Certified coy of Agreement of Chit.
Ex.B2. Certified copy of gurantee.
Ex.B3. Certified copy of promissory note.
Ex.B4. Certified copy of E.P.No. 38/2005.
Ex.B5. Certified copy of P.S memo along with certified
Copy of docket order in E.P.No.38/2005.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to:-
1. Sri.C. Challa Sudhakara Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool.
2. Sri.Sri. B.V.Ramana Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool.
3. Sri.S.V.Krishna Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool.
Copy was made ready on:
Copy was dispatched on:
Copy was delivered to parties:
0
