DATE OF FILING : 4.10.2011
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 28th day of December, 2011
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.BINDHU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.210/2011
Between
Complainant : Ratheesh C. Nair,
Block No.386,
Thookkupalam, Balagram P.O.,
Kallar – 685552,
Idukki District.
And
Opposite Parties : 1. The Branch Manager,
Balagram Service Co-operative
Bank Ltd.,
Thookkupalam Branch,
Balagram P.O.,
Kallar – 685552,
Idukki District.
2. The Secretary,
Balagram Service Co-operative
Bank Ltd.,
Balagram P.O.,
Kallar – 685552,
Idukki District.
(By Adv: V.M. Joymon)
3. The Assistant Registrar
(Arbitrator) (General),
Nedumkandam – 685553,
Idukki District.
O R D E R
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
The complainant joined in a chit of the opposite party bank, which has a sala of Rs.50,000/- in the chit number 16/03. The chit was auctioned in the name of the complainant and the documents were signed by the complainant on 1st January, 2004. But the amount was not at all disbursed to the complainant. The amount of the chit was auctioned by the complainant in order to meet the treatment expenses of his mother. But the opposite party told that there is due in the chit account at the
(cont....2)
- 2 -
Mundiyeruma Branch of the opposite party and so the amount has been accounted in that. So the complainant never repaid the amount because of the non-payment of the amount. The opposite party initiated recovery proceedings against the complainant. The opposite party demanded Rs.10,000/- as capital amount, Rs.2,007/- as interest and special interest Rs.623/-, notice expense Rs.150/-, miscellaneous expense Rs.300/- and so a total of Rs.13,088/- and a notice was issued by the opposite party to appear the complainant on 15.9.2011. All the matters were revealed by the complainant at that time while he appeared there. But the 3rd opposite party was not ready to hear the things. The complainant was promptly paying the chit amount at the opposite party bank as a regular customer. The 3rd opposite party is not entitled to issue summons to the complainant or to proceed against the complainant. So this petition is filed for cancelling the demand notice issued for an amount of Rs.13,088/- and also for compensation.
2. As per the written version filed by the opposite party, it is stated that the complainant is a member of the opposite party as No. B 1342. So the dispute should be raised at the Assistant Registrar (General), Udumbanchola. It is not sustainable before this Forum. It is admitted that the complainant has joined in the chit No. 16/03 of the opposite party as group deposit and it was auctioned in the name of the complainant on 29.11.2003 for an amount of Rs.35,000/- and the entire amount Rs.35,000/- was received by the complainant as per voucher No.2904, on 1.1.2004 with the surety of Smt. M.R. Ponnamma. After receiving the amount, the complainant was paying the share amount upto 14.2.2007. After that not even a single amount has been repaid by the complainant. So demand notices were issued several times to the complainant. A case was registered as ARC No.411/09 before the Assistant Registrar, Udumbanchola and there is a due of Rs.15,731/- in the group chit No.16/03. So this petition is filed only for avoiding the payment of the due amount of the chit as experimental.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?
4. The evidence consists of oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 and P2 marked on the side of the complainant and oral testimony of DWs1 and 2 Exts.R1 to R6 marked on the side of the opposite parties.
5. The POINT :- The complainant produced evidence as PW1. The copy of the plaint of the ARC case filed by the opposite party against the complainant for demanding Rs.13,088/- is marked as Ext.P1. Copy of the 5th page of the bye-law of
the bank is marked as Ext.P2. PW1 admitted that he joined in the group deposit in the opposite party bank. As per the cross examination of the learned counsel for the
(cont...3)
- 3 -
opposite party, the complainant is not aware of the date on which he had joined in the chit and as per the suggestion of the opposite party, he was joined on 29.11.2003. As per the PW1, the number of the group deposit is 16/03. The chit was auctioned in the name of the complainant for an amount of Rs.35,000/- and an application was given to the bank on 1.1.2004 for getting the amount and that application is marked as Ext.R1. The voucher was also signed by the PW1 and it is written that as “cash paid” and that voucher is marked as Ext.R2. The guarantee agreement was also signed by the complainant and two sureties of the complainant and it is marked as Ext.R3. PW1 deposed that eventhough he signed in the voucher, the amount was not disbursed to him by the opposite party stating that there is due in the Mundiyeruma Branch of the opposite party by the complainant. PW1 was promptly paying the amount upto the instalment on 14.2.2007 and it is also deposed by PW1 that there is due of 15 instalments for PW1 in that account and had paid Rs.40,000/- in that account. DW1 who is the Secretary of the opposite party deposed that the complainant had paid 40 instalments to the opposite party bank and there is a pending of 10 instalments with interest, ARC charges and notice charges due to the opposite party bank. PW1 also deposed that the person who are residing in Udumbanchola Taluk are entitled for B Class Membership of the society and it is written in the bye-law. The amount has been disbursed to the PW1. If it was accounted in any other account of the complainant, the cash paid seal will not be affixed on the voucher. In Ext.R2, a seal is affixed stating cash paid. DW2 is the Branch Manager of the opposite party. The chit amount Rs.35,000/- was disbursed to PW1 on 1.1.2004. While the amount receives by the parties, the opposite party will get the signature of the party in the ledger and also in the voucher. The amount was disbursed as cash and the denomination was also written in the back side of the voucher. The copy of the cash transactions of the bank for 3 days from 1.1.2004 is produced and marked as Ext.R5, in which the complainant's entry has been recorded as 16/03. The complainant is having a due of Rs.17,751/- to the opposite party bank in the chit account.
As per the complainant, he joined in the group deposit chit of the opposite party for a sala of Rs.50,000/- and the chit was auctioned in the name of the complainant for an amount of Rs.35,000/- on 1.1.2004 and he had filed an application
for getting the money and also signed in the voucher for the receipt of the amount. But the amount was not disbursed to him and it was accounted in the Mundiyeruma Branch stating that he is having a due in that account. The opposite party issued a demand notice for an amount of Rs.13,088/- which the complainant is not entitled to pay. Ext.R6 is the application given by the complainant for getting the B Class membership in the opposite party bank. As per the opposite party, it is admitted that
the complainant joined in the group deposit chit as No.16/03. But it was in the year 2003 and the amount received by the complainant as per the Ext.R2 voucher and
(cont....4)
- 4 -
after 2007, the complainant is not at all paying any amount to the opposite party. So a demand notice was issued for that.
Ext.R2 is the voucher produced by the opposite party for disbursement of an amount of Rs.35,000/- on 1.1.2004 and it is duly signed by the complainant stating that he received the same. On the back side of the voucher, it is stated that the denomination of Rs.35,000/- as Rs.500 x 40 = 20,000, 100 x 100 = 10,000 and 50 x 100 = 5000 and it is signed by the complainant. Ext.R3 is the copy of the guarantee agreement created by the bank with the complainant and two of the sureties for the receipt of Rs.35,000/- on 1.1.2004. It is also signed by the complainant and two of the sureties named M.R. Ponnamma and M.R. Gopalakrishnan Nair. A witness also signed named Shajeela. PW1 also admitted that he had signed in the Ext.R2 voucher and also in the Ext.R3 guarantee agreement. The amount was not received by him because the bank stated that he is having a due in the opposite party branch. It is also admitted by PW1 that he was repaying the amount promptly upto 14.2.2007 and he paid about Rs.40,000/- and there is a due of 15 instalments. DW1 who is the Secretary of the opposite party deposed that the cash has been received by PW1 on 1.1.2004 and in Ext.R2, the seal has been affixed as cash paid because the amount has been disbursed as cash and not accounted in any other account of the complainant. The complainant had paid 40 instalments and 10 instalments with interest and other charges are pending. DW2 who is the Manager of the opposite party also deposed that the amount has been disbursed to the complainant and the complainant has signed in the Ext.R2 voucher and denomination of the amount is also recorded in the Ext.R2.
On perusing the evidence, it is very clear that the complainant has signed as cash received in Ext.R2 voucher and also in guarantee agreement, but the complainant disputed that he never received the amount. So if the complainant has not yet received the amount, how he created a guarantee agreement to the opposite party, there is no explanation for the same. He also admitted the signature of the complainant in the guarantee agreement and also in the voucher. So if that amount is not received by the complainant what prevented the complainant to file a criminal case or any other complaint against the opposite party for committing forgery. After receiving the amount, the complainant was promptly paying the instalments to the opposite party upto 14.2.2007 and it is also admitted by the complainant that he paid Rs.40,000/- to the opposite party and 15 instalments are due to him in that account. It is also deposed by PW1 that after seven years of the dispute, the complaint is filed before this Forum, not filed before any other authority. Moreover, the complaint is filed only for cancelling the demand notice. There is no complaint regarding the non-receipt of the money from the opposite party. So we think that the version of the complainant is not at all believable. The complainant is having a due of an amount of Rs.17,751/- to the opposite party as per the DW2 and the complainant
(cont...5)
- 5 -
also admitted that he is having a due of 15 instalments to the opposite party and a demand notice has been received by the complainant for the payment of the amount. So this complaint has been filed to avoid the payment of the same. There is no deficiency in service has been proved against the opposite parties by the complainant.
Hence the petition dismissed. No cost is ordered against the complainant.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of December, 2011
Sd/-
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
Sd/-
SMT. BINDHU SOMAN (MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Depositions :
On the side of the Complainant :
PW1 - Ratheesh C. Nair.
On the side of the Opposite Parties :
DW1 - Ushakumary. P.V.
DW2 - Jose. K.V.
Exhibits :
On the side of the Complainant :
Ext.P1 - The copy of the plaint filed by the opposite party against the
complainant.
Ext.P2 - Copy of the 5th page of the bye-law of the bank.
On the side of the Opposite Parties :
Ext.R1 - Copy of the application given by the complainant for getting the money in the group deposit.
Ext.R2 - The voucher for the payment of Rs.35,000/-.
Ext.R3 - Copy of the guarantee agreement given by the complainant.
Ext.R4 - Copy of the ledger page of the chit account of the complainant.
Ext.R5 - The copy of the cash transactions of the bank.
Ext.R6 - The application given by the complainant for getting the B Class
membership in the opposite party bank.
