Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/166/2018

Smt Jyothi.B - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Sri Ram Chits Karnataka Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.Thippeswamy.N

30 May 2019

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:30/08/2018

DISPOSED      ON:30/05/2019

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

CC.NO:166/2018

 

DATED: 30^th MAY 2019

PRESENT :-         SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH :         PRESIDENT                                                             B.A., LL.B.,

                             SRI. SHIVAKUMAR.K.N         :     MEMBER

                                      B.Com.LL.B.,

                             SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,         :      LADY MEMBER

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	Smt. Jyothi. B, D/o Basavaraj, Advocate and Co-Editor, Prabhudha News, Monthly Paper, R/o Behind V.G Shettru House, Holalkere Road, Chitradurga.   (Rep by Sri.N. Thippesway, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. Branch Manager, Srirama chits Karnataka private limited, Amogha Complex, Chitradurga. 2. The Divisional Manager, Srirama Chits Karnataka Pvt. Limited, Akshodaya, 259/31, 1st Floor, 10th cross, Vilson Garden, Bangalore.   (Rep by Sri.N.S.Shyamasunder, Advocate)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 for the reliefs to direct the OPs to refund Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest @ 3% p.m, Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony, to refund Rs.2,750/-, which was debited from her account, not to initiate any case against the complainant and her surety  and to grant such other relief.  

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, the OP No.1 is running a chit fund business at Chitradurga.  In the year 2015, the complainant has obtained a chit under Chit No.1410/63002/2013 for Rs.3,00,000/- and on the same day, the complainant has paid Rs.2,000/- towards application charge.  The duration of the chit is for 40 months.  It is further submitted that, the first chit started on 30.05.2015.  When the complainant went for bidding the chit, the Branch Manager told the complainant that, if the member wants to bid first chit, the OP told the complainant that, she has to quit 40% of the bid amount and to furnish surety of three Government Employees and to give blanks cheques of nationalized Bank.  The complainant has paid Rs.7,500/- for the first two months, and installment amount of Rs.6,000/- each and Rs.8000/- each, in all a sum of Rs.2,16,302/- and a fine amount of Rs.5,000/-  After lapse of 30 installments, the complainant approached OP to give chit amount, by that time, the OP informed the complainant that, if she wants to get the 40^th chit, she has to quit Rs.15,000/- to the company and to bear the other charges and if she get the 34^th chit, she will get an amount of Rs.2,81,000/- and issued a cheque for Rs.2,63,575/- by taking two blank cheques of Federal Bank and told the complainant that, there is a balance of Rs,45,000/- to be paid by the complainant, which is a deficiency of service and cheated the complainant.   Therefore, the complainant has issued legal notice to the OPs on 23.03.2018 requesting to repay Rs.2,21,302/- with interest, Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.2,750/- towards other expenses taken by the OP, but the OPs failed to reply the same.   After five months of receipt of notice, the OPs have issued notice on 09.08.2018 demanding to pay the amount.  Thereafter on 22.03.2018, the complainant has issued a notice and on 29.08.2018 the complainant has filed this complaint.  After that, when the case is pending before this Forum, the OPs have presented the blank cheques before the Bank on 03.11.2018, which were obtained from the complainant and issued a notice through their counsel demanding to pay the amount within 15 days stating that, if the complainant failed to pay the amount, they will initiate a case against her, which is a deficiency of service.  Thereafter, the OPs have filed a case No.DRD. Chit No.8/2017-18 before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, which is a deficiency of service and dereliction of duties and hen, prayed for allow the complaint.

3.      After service of notice to the OPs, OPs appeared through Sri.N.S. Shyamasunder, Advocate and filed version.  According to the version filed by the OPs, they have admitted that, they are running the chit fund business and the complainant is a member under member ship No.1410/63002/2013.  Further it is admitted that, the complainant has paid the necessary charges to the OP.  It is false to state that, the OP induced the complainant by getting hues margin and profit by paying 40 installments and getting dividend.  It is true that, the first chit was conducted on 30.05.2015 and it is false to state that, the OP put a conditions like 40% of the amount has been left and bid the chit, three Government sureties should be furnished and to give blank cheques of Nationalized Bank.  It is true to state that, the complainant has paid first two months to a tune of Rs.7,500/- and Rs.6,000/-, but it is false to state that, the complainant has paid Rs.8,000/- in 34 installments and paid penalty of Rs.5,000/-.  It is false to state that, the complainant approached the OP and enquired about the chit, the OP threatened that after 40^th installment the complainant has to left Rs.15,000/- to the company, if bid the 34^th installment, she will get Rs.2,81,000/-, the OP has issued a cheque for Rs.2,63,575/- after obtaining two blank cheques drawn on Federal Bank.  It is further false to state that, the complainant has paid Rs.2,71,302/- to the OP.  It is false to state that, the complainant has reviewed Rs.2,21,302/- and taken liability of Rs.45,000/- and the OP has utilized the said amount for three years and it is further false to state that, the OP has threatened the complainant to file case on bank cheques.  The notice issued by the complainant is properly replied by the OP.  The averments made in para 8 to 12 are false and the complainant is put to strict proof of the same, therefore, the complaint is barred by time.  The complainant has suppressed the material facts and infact the contract entered into between the parties cannot be decided before this Forum.  The complainant has to approach the Civil Court for redressal of relief.  The transaction entered into between the parties is commercial in nature, the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies is the proper person to decide the case under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act.  Therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable either under law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed. 

4.      Complainant herself has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-8 were got marked and closed her side. On behalf of OPs, one Sri. Yallappa, the Assistant Branch Manager of OP No.1 has examined as DW-1 and relied on Ex.B-1 and B-2 documents and closed their side.  

 

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that OPs have failed to repay the amount collected from her towards chit and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (3) What order?

         7.       Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

                    Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative. 

                    Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.      Point No.1:- It is not in dispute that, the complainant is the member of chit commenced by OPs in the year 2015.  There are 40 members in the chit.  The complainant has paid an amount of Rs.7,500/- for first two months and remaining installments she has paid Rs.6,000/- and Rs.8,000/- each, in all she has paid Rs.2,16,302/- and Rs.5,000/- as fine amount for 34 installments.  In 34^th installment, the complainant will get the chit amount from the OP, by that time, the OP has issued a cheque for Rs.2,63,575/- instead of Rs.2,81,000/-.  The OP has deducted an amount of Rs.17,425/- and further the OP has demanded the complainant to pay Rs.45,000/- to the OPs’ chit fund.  The Advocate for the complainant argued that, the OP has collected the amount from the complainant for Rs.2,81,000/-.  At the time of collecting the amount, the OP told that, they will pay the dividend amount to the parties.  Now the OP has deducted Rs.17,425/- from the amount of the complainant and asked Rs.45,000/- in excess and blank cheues from the party.  Further the complainant submits that the OP has tried to initiate cheque bounce case against her on the basis of blank cheques collected from the complainant.  Further the OP has to initiate Arbitration case before the ARCS, Chitradurga.  Therefore, in any angle we see, the OPs have committed deficiency of service while returning the amount to the members of the chit and they have cheated the public by collecting the blank cheques.  The Advocate for the OPs argued that, the complainant has put his signature and in the agreement he has agreed all the terms and conditions of the agreement.  But the complainant has produced 8 documents, those are clearly shows that, the complainant is the bidder of the chit, when the bidder has taken the chit by bidding, it is the duty of the OP to pay the amount to the complainant.  In this case, the OP has paid Rs.2,63,575/-, but the complainant has paid Rs.2,81,000/-.  The OP has collected Rs.17,425/- as extra amount from the party and they have also demanded the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.45,000/- extra.  The OPs have collected blank cheques from the complainant, it is not permissible under law, it is one kind of offence by the OP.  On 26.11.2018, the OP has issued legal notice through their counsel to the complainant and demanded to pay Rs.46,275/- and in the said notice, the OPs have admitted that, they have collected post dated cheques from the complainant.  On the basis of post dated cheques, the OP has tried to file the cheque bounce case against the complainant, it is also one kind of cheating the public and OPs have committed deficiency of service, the law is not permitted to any Finance or Bank Authority or anybody to collect the blank cheques from the parties.  In this case, the OP has committed deficiency of service while collecting the blank cheques. 

9.      We have gone through the entire documents filed by both sides.  There is no dispute between both the parties that, the complainant is the bidder of the chit of the OP.  The OP admits that, they have collected Rs.2,81,000/- from the complainant in 34 installments, but they have paid only Rs.2,63,757/- and also demanded extra amount of Rs.45,000/- from the complainant.  Such being the case, this Forum comes to the conclusion that, the OPs have committed deficiency of service and accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.           

10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

            The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

            It is ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to return Rs.17,425/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of commencement of the chit. 

            Further, the OPs are hereby directed not to initiate any cheque bounce case on the basis of blank cheques obtained from the complainant and further directed not to initiate any recovery proceedings before any authority against the complainant and her surety. 

Further it is ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceedings.

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

            (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 30/05/2019 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

PW-1:  Sri. Yallappa, the Assistant Branch Manager of OP No.1 by way of affidavit evidence.

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Payment details
02	Ex-A-2:-	Details of amount paid by OP
03	Ex-A-3:-	Cheque dated 21.02.2018
04	Ex-A-4:-	Legal notice dated 22.03.2018
05	Ex-A-5:-	Postal receipts
06	Ex-A-6:-	Legal notice dated 09.08.2018
07	Ex-A-7:-	Bank Pass Book
08	Ex-A-8:-	Notice under DRD Chit No.08/2018-19

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

01	Ex-B-1:-	Installment wise payment details
02	Ex-B-2:-	Legal notice dated 12.12.2018

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER           MEMBER                                PRESIDENT

Rhr**