The Branch Manager,K.S.F.E.,Kundara V/S Omana Alexander, Vazhappallil Puthen Veedu, Nallil
Omana Alexander, Vazhappallil Puthen Veedu, Nallil filed a consumer case on 10 Oct 2007 against The Branch Manager,K.S.F.E.,Kundara in the Kollam Consumer Court. The case no is CC/07/94 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
Kerala
Kollam
CC/07/94
Omana Alexander, Vazhappallil Puthen Veedu, Nallil - Complainant(s)
Versus
The Branch Manager,K.S.F.E.,Kundara - Opp.Party(s)
10 Oct 2007
ORDER
KOLLAM CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM consumer case(CC) No. CC/07/94
Omana Alexander, Vazhappallil Puthen Veedu, Nallil
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
The Branch Manager,K.S.F.E.,Kundara The Managing Director,K.S.F.E.,Registered Office, Bhadratha
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
1. K.VIJAYAKUMARAN ACHARI 2. RAVI SUSHA
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
By ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER This complaint is filed for getting an order declaring that the complainant had paid the entire chitty installments and for compensation and cost. It is stated in the complaint as follows: The complainant is the subscriber of the opposite parties vides chitty No.30/97, Chittal No.41 which commenced on 23.12.1997 and terminated on 5.3.2006 conducted by the 1st opp.party. The complainant had paid the entire installments and the last installment was paid on 2.3.2006. The complainant received the chitty amount and the 1st opp.party returned the entire documents deposited before the 1st opp.party, and 1st opp.party made an endorsement on 4.4.;06 to the effect that all the amounts are paid on 2.3.2006. But on 24.11.2006 the complainant received a letter from 1st opp.party directing to pay an amount of Rs.1000/- . In the said letter it was stated that the complainant had not paid the 100th installment of Rs.1000/-. The act of the opp.party demanding more amount from the complainant even when she had paid the entire installments and closed the chitty transactions and received back the documents amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Due to the act of the 1st opp.party the complainant had undergone severe mental tension and agony. Hence prays for relief. The complainants daughter was examined as PW.1 and marked Exts.P1 to P4. The opp.parties dared not to turn up. Hence they stand declared exparte. The point to be determined is whether the complainant deserves relief as prayed for.The complainant had proved her case through the complaint, affidavit, deposition in chief and exhibits marked. The complainant was heard. As no evidence is adduced from the side of the opp.party, we are constrained to rely upon the exparte evidence. Exts. P2 and P4 show that the complain ant had remitted the entire chitty installments and the chitty was closed. Hence we find that issuing further letter that the complainant had not paid the 100th installment of Rs.1000/- is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties. Therefore the complainant is entitled to get relief. In the result the complaint is allowed, declaring that the complainant had paid the entire chitty installment vide No.30/97, chital No.41. The opp.parties are also directed to pay Rs.1000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as cost of this proceeding. The order is to be complied within one month from the date of this order. Dated this the 10th day of October, 2007. K. Vijayakumaran Nair :Sd/- Adv. Ravi Susha :Sd/- Forwarded/by Order, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT I n d e x List of witnesses for the complainant: PW.1. Maya Alexander. List of documents for the complainant P1. Authorization letter P2. Certificate P3. Legal notice dated 24.11.2006. P4. Pass book.