DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
Civil Station, Palakkad 678001, Kerala
Dated this the 29th day of August, 2011
Present: Smt.Preetha G Nair, Member
: Smt.Bhanumathi A.K. Member Date of filing: 30/12/2010
CC/181/2010
P.M.Swaraj,
S/o.B.Muthu Rowther,
Palakkunnam House,
Kinasseri Post, -Complainant
Palakkad Dt.
(By Adv.Dhananjayan)
Vs
1.The Manager,
M/s Hemambika Chitties & Loans Pvt. Ltd.,
Regd. Office at 31/351 Ennakkottil Street,
Big Bazaar, Palakkad 678 014.
-Opposite parties
2.Chairman/M.D,
M/s Hemambika Chitties & Loans Pvt. Ltd.,
Regd. Office at 31/351 Ennakkottil Street,
Big Bazaar, Palakkad 678 014.
(By Adv.K.V.Sujith)
O R D E R
BY SMT. BHANUMATHI.A.K, MEMBER
The case of the complainant is as follows:
Complainant was a subscriber to a Chitty transaction, bearing Chitty No.10-J ie, 8th Pooval Kuri which has been initiated and conducted in the year 1994. As per the terms and conditions of the above chitty the subscriber was required to remit the chitty amount in the month of April, August and December in every year. The complainant was remitting the monthly subscription promptly and accurately. The complainant then auctioned the kuri and the proceeds have been deposited with the opposite parties company. As per the terms of the kuri, the kuri was terminated on 8th August 2010. The complainant had deposited Rs.40,000/- with the opposite parties and issued a fixed receipt to the complainant bearing Receipt No.172 on 06/10/1994 aggreeing to repay the amount of Rs.40,000/- and an interest shall be paid to the complainant at the rate of 14% per annum. As per the terms and conditions of the kuri the opposite parties are bound to pay Rs.1,29,600/- ie Rs.40,000/- with an accured interest at the rate of 14% per annum to the complainant after 8th August, 2010. The fixed deposit had been matured on 10th August, 2010. After the due date the complainant has approached the opposite parties to get back the said amount. But the opposite parties have not paid. The amount is still retaining with opposite parties. This action of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service. At this the complainant had issued a lawyer notice to the opposite parties. Even after the receipt of the lawyer notice opposite parties have not paid the amount. So the complainant seeking an order directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.1,54,000/- as compensation for the loss and mental agony along with the cost of the proceedings.
Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version with the following contentions:
Opposite parties admit that the petitioner was a subscriber to the kuri styled as 8th day Pooval Kuri No.10-J conducted by opposite parties. The sala of the kuri was Rs. 1,25,000/- out of which Rs. 25,000/- was the fixed discount and Rs.1,00,000/- the prize money. The petitioner bid the kuri in the auction held on 09/05/1994 foregoing Rs.61,000/- as auction discount. Reducting auction discount and fixed discount he was entitled to Rs.39,000/- as kuri amount. The said amount together with Rs. 1,000/- he remitted, Vide receipt No.1011 dated 06/10/1994 making up a total of Rs.40,000/- was deposited by him with the company by way of security for the due payment of the future instalments of the kuri, Vide the receipt No.172. On the same day he excuted a kuri security bond whereby he undertook to pay the future 48 instalments of the kuri at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per instalment and also agreed that the amount deposited as security and the interest accuring thereon shall be a charge on his liability to pay the future instalments of the kuri.
Opposite party says that apart from the payments of Rs.3,169/- made by him towards the kuri, instalments numbers 1 and 2 he didnot pay anything towards any of the subsequent 48 instalments. As such the company was appropriating the interest accuring on the security deposite towards the kuri subscription as and when each instalments of the subscription fell due and when the interest accuring fell short of the amount due by way of subscription, the deficiency was made good from out of the principal amount itself.
Though the rate of interest stipulated in the receipt was 14% per annum in due course of time the Board of Directors of the company resolved to reduce the rate of interest payable on security deposit furnished by the subscribers from 14% to 8%. The company made it known to the subscribers. So the balance amount payable to the complainant is only Rs.15,780. The complainant is free to collect the above maintained amount from the registered office of the company. So the opposite parties prays for the dismissal of the complaint with cost.
Both parties filed their respective affidavits. A1 to A3 marked on the side of the complainant and B1 to B4 marked on the side of the opposite parties. Complainant and opposite party were cross examined as PW1 and DW1.
Matter heard.
Issues to be considered are,
1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the amount stated in the prayer of the complaint?
2. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the popposite parties? If so,
3. What is the relief and cost entitled to?
Issues I & II
The complainant was a subscriber to a Chitty transaction Chitty No.10J ie, 8th Pooval Kuri which has been conducted by the opposite parties. As per the terms and conditions of the chitty he was required to remit the chitty amount in the month of April, August and December every year. He was remitting the monthly subscription correctly. Then he auctioned the kuri and the proceeds have been deposited with the opposite parties. All these are admitted by the opposite parties. Ext.A1 and A3 also reveals the same. In Ext.A1 ie, the Fixed Receipt bearing No.172 on 06/10/1994 it is seen that an interest shall be paid at the rate of 14% to the deposited amount. As per the terms and conditions of the kuri opposite parties are bound to pay Rs.1,29,600/- ie, Rs 40,000/- the principal amount with an accured interest at the rate of 14% per annum. But opposite parties did not return the above said amount. The complainant joined the kuri with ticket No.172 and bid it in the auction held on 09/05/1994 foregoing an auction discount of Rs.61,000/-, deducting the auction discount, the fixed discount and other goings he was entitled to Rs.39,000/-. After remitting an amount of Rs.1,000/- Rs.40,000/- was deposited by him with the company by way of security for the due payments of the future instalments of Kuri. He excuted a kuri security bond, Ext.B1 on the same day. Where by he undertook to pay the future 48 instalments of kuri at the rate of Rs.2500/- per instalments, in default of payments of any instalment on due date, the amount in default with interest these on at the rate of 12% per annum and in default of such payments, to pay on demand the entire amount due to in respect of all the remaining instalments in lump with interest thereon at he said rate from the date of the first default. The amount deposited as security and iterest accuring there on shall be a charge on his liability to pay the future instalments of kuri. But after bidding the kuri the complainant has not paid any amount towards the kuri instalments. If he made any payment he can very well produce the receipts. Not making payments towards the kuri instalment in the violating of Kuri Security Bond. If the opposite parties are giving 14% of interest to an amount of 40,000/- as promised the kuri instalments may be paid without making further amount. But the Board of Directors of the company resolved to reduce the rate of interest payable on security deposits furnished by the subscribers from 14% to 8% opposite parties informed the matter to the complainant. Complainant may be in the expectation of getting 14% of interest that bid the kuri and deposited the amount with the opposite parties. While in the cross examination the complainant deposited that "the opposite parties have adjusted future subscription of kuri from 3rd instalmets to 27th instalment from interest accured 8th Fixed Receipt and thereafter they have not adjusted that amount. Because the opposite parties reduced the interest from 14% to 8%. The reduction of the rate of interest surely affected the complainant. It is not easy to substitute other form of security. The opposite parties did not produce any documents regarding the details of resolution passed by the opposite parties.
Opposite parties ready to pay the balance amount to the complainant after reducing the monthly instalments towards the kuri that comes to Rs.15,760/- ie., Ext.B2. If the rate of interest is not reduced the complainant is entitled to get more amount than the deposited amount.
From the above discussions we are of the view that even though the opposite parties have the right to make change in their terms and conditions according to Ext.B1 they are bound to produce the relevant records regarding the same. But opposite parties did not do the same.
In the result complaint allowed. Opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to pay the amount of Rs.15,780/- along with 10,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as the cost of the proceedings.
Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of receipt of order till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 29th day of August, 2011.
Sd/-
Smt.Preetha G Nair
Member
Sd/-
Smt.Bhanumathi A K
Member
A P P E N D I X
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant
Ext.A1- Copy of the Fixed Deposite receipt issued to the complainant by the opposite party
bearing Receipt No.172 for Rs.40,000/- dated 06/10/1994.
Ext.A2- Copy of the lawyer notice, postal receipt and acknowledgement card.
Ext.A3- 8th Day Pooval Kuri Pass Book of the complainant bearing Chitty No. 10J.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties
Ext.B1-The original of Kuri Security Bond with guarantors.
Ext.B2- Statement of accounts in the kuri of the complainant.
Ext.B3- Letter issued by the opposite party to the complainant dated 01/03/2005.
Ext.B4- Certificate of Posting received from the City Post Office , Palakkad dated 18/10/2005.
Witness examined on the side of the complainant
PW1- P. M. Swaraj.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties
DW1- C.Jayendran.
Cost allowed
Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two Thousand Only) allowed as cost of proceedings.
