BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 424/2004 Filed on 16.11.2004

Dated : 30.09.2009

Complainant:

Radhamani, Thenguvila Veedu, Kannankarakonam, Thonnakkal P.O, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. K.S. Gopinathan Nair)

Opposite parties:

1. The Manager, K.S.F.E Attingal Branch.

2. The Regional Manager, K.S.F.E, Thiruvananthapuram.

3. The Managing Director, K.S.F.E, Thrissur.

(By adv. P.K. Venugopal)

This O.P having been heard on 31.08.2009, the Forum on 30.09.2009 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. BEENAKUMARI.A: MEMBER

Complainant Radhamani is a subscriber of K.S.F.E Chitty as per chitty No. 26/2000 and chittal No. 41. The chitty amount is Rs. 1 lakh. The complainant regularly paid the instalments till 16.09.2004. On that day when she came before the opposite party's office to remit the chitty instalment she was informed that the chitty had bid in her favour on 18.08.2003. Immediately after that she enquired the Manager about the chitty. Then he replied that he had informed the matter at that time itself by registered post. The complainant enquired at the post office about this, then the post office authorities told her that they have got nothing from K.S.F.E for the complainant. Thereafter again the complainant approached the opposite party for her grievances. But they behaved very badly towards the complainant. Complainant sent notices to the opposite party, but they did not respond to it. Hence she has approached before this Forum for the redressal of her grievances.

Opposite parties 1 to 3 filed version contending the case of the complainant. They state that complainant who is subscriber to chitty No. 26/00/41 bid the chitty at auction held on 18.08.2003. She filed proxy in favour of this opposite party to bid the chitty on her behalf in her absence and it is on the basis of the proxy that chitty was confirmed in her favour. As per terms of proxy this opposite party is not bound to inform the fact of bidding. Subscriber is to enquire with the Branch and understand the result of each auction. Inspite of specific condition, this respondent intimated the complainant result of auction on 22.08.2003. She did not produce surety for drawal of prize money. She was intimated about prizing of chitty in her favour when she visited the Branch for remitting chitty subscription. She did not receive money as she could not procure surety or else she was not in necessity of money since chitty was confirmed in her absence on the basis of the proxy produced on 16.05.2003. On receipt of her complaint about non-receipt of prize intimation letter, this opposite party enquired with the Attingal Post Office about the fate of registered prize intimation letter addressed to complainant and customers care centre of Postal Department intimated that the letter was duly despatched on 22.08.2003 and was delivered on 27.08.2003. A subsequent letter under certificate of posting was sent to complainant on 25.10.2004, but she did not turn up to receive the prize money by producing surety. This opposite party is willing to release the prize money on and when she produced surety as per rules of the company represented by this respondent. There is no deficiency of service so as to attract intervention of Hon'ble Forum. In the circumstances complaint is only to be dismissed in limine. Further they submit that she did not produce sureties till the date of filing of complaint for drawal of prize money even after her coming to know of bidding on 16.09.2004.

Points that would arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether there is deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties?

2. Reliefs and costs.

Points (i) & (ii):- In this case the main allegation of the complainant is that the 1^st opposite party, the Branch Manager, K.S.F.E Attingal did not inform the matter to the complainant that the chitty was bid in her favour on 18.08.2003. She know the fact only on 16.09.2004 when she came before the opposite party's office to remit the chitty instalment. As per the complainant, it is the duty of the opposite parties to inform the matter to the subscribers immediately after the auction. Hence there is deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties. To prove her contentions she has filed proof affidavit and deposed as PW1 and produced 4 documents as Exts. P1 to P4. Ext. P1 is the copy of chitty pass book of Chitty No. 26/00 in the name of complainant. As per this document date of commencement of chitty is seen 23.12.2000 and date of termination of chitty is 17.03.2009. In this document it is seen that the complainant had paid the instalment upto 46. Ext. P2 is the copy of notice issued by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party dated 19.09.2004 demanding chitty amount. Ext. P3 is the copy of the notice issued by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party dated 30.10.2004 requesting the payment of chitty amount which has been bid on 18.08.2003. Ext. P4 is the copy of letter issued by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party on 30.10.2004. In this letter the complainant had stated that the letter was sent on 25.10.2004. The opposite party replied that the complainant should as soon as possible receive the chitty amount from the opposite party. The complainant through this letter informed the opposite party that she was not willing to accept the amount. She demanded interest for that amount. In this case to prove the contentions of the opposite party, the opposite parties have filed proof affidavit and examined as DW1 and produced 9 documents. The opposite parties stated that they have informed the complainant regarding the above prize intimation on 22.08.2003. But the complainant did not produce surety for drawal of prize money and draw the chitty amount. On receipt of her complaint about non-receipt of prize intimation letter, the opposite party enquired with the Attingal Post Office about the fate of registered prize intimation letter addressed to complainant and customer care centre of Postal Department intimated that the letter duly despatched on 22.08.2003 was delivered on 27.08.2003. The opposite party also argued that she was intimated directly about the prize several times when she visited the 1^st opposite party for the remittance of chitty subscription. To prove the contentions the opposite parties have filed 9 documents which were marked as Exts. D1 to D9. Ext. D1 is the copy of intimation letter sent by the opposite party to the complainant. In this letter opposite party stated that the chitty was bid in her favour and directed the complainant to produce sufficient surety to receive the amount. The date of letter is seen as 18.08.2003. Ext. D2 is the copy of attested copy of postal journal of uninsured registered letter of postal department. From this document we can see that a registered letter has been issued in the name of complainant Radhamani on 26/00/41. Ext. D4 is the copy of the letter issued by the 1^st opposite party to the Head Postmaster, Post Office, Attingal. Through that letter 1^st opposite party enquired with the postal authorities whether the registered letter sent by the opposite party on 22.08.2003 has been received by the complainant or not. Ext. D4 is the copy of reminder sent by the 1^st opposite party to the Postal Department. Ext. D5 is the copy of letter sent by the 1^st opposite party to the complainant on 25.10.2004 requesting her to receive the chitty amount with sufficient surety. Ext. D6 is the copy of postal receipt of Ext. D5. Ext. D7 is the copy of letter issued from Customer Care Centre of Postal Department on 15.01.2005. As per this letter, it is seen that the registered letter sent by the opposite party on 22.08.2003 to the complainant has been delivered on 27.08.2003. This document is the ample proof that there is no deficiency in service from the side of 1^st opposite party. The 1^st opposite party informed the matter to the complainant on 22.08.2003. Ext. D8 is the original proxy authorizing the 1^st opposite party to bid the chitty in favour of the complainant. Ext. D9 is the terms and conditions of chitty. At the time of cross examination of the complainant the counsel for the opposite party asked her that “നിങ്ങള്‍ surety കൊടുക്കാന്‍ ആളില്ലാത്തതിനാല്‍ ചിട്ടി പിടിച്ച തുക വാങ്ങാതിരുന്നതല്ലേ? അല്ല. എന്‍റെ മകന്‍ സര്‍ക്കാര്‍ ജോലിക്കാരനാണ്. പിന്നെ എനിക്ക് പുരയിടം ഉണ്ട്. അതിനാല്‍ ഇത് കളവാണ്”. But the complainant did not produce any evidence to prove her statement. In this case complainant admitted that she knew the matter on 16.09.2004, but till date she never turned up to withdraw the prize money by producing surety. A chitty subscriber is also equally responsible to enquire with regard to the bidding of the chitty. As per Rules without the production of surety no chitty prize money will be disbursed. In the instant case, from the documents and pleadings it could be found that the complainant has never produced any surety before the opposite parties and the complainant has no case that inspite of production of sureties, she has not been given the prize money. Here only allegation is that she has not been informed with regard to the chitty prize intimation but this is controverted by Ext. D7 produced by the opposite parties. From the above we are of the view that the complainant has miserably failed to establish any allegations levelled against the opposite parties and moreover the allegation in the complaint are not at all justifiable. From the pleadings, documents and evidences adduced by the complainant and opposite parties we are of the view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of opposite parties. The opposite parties informed the bidding of chitty on 22.08.2003 itself to the complainant. Ext. D7 is the evidence of that registered letter delivery. In this case complainant was not ready to produce surety to receive the amount. The complainant did not turn up to receive the chitty amount after the lapse of 6 years. As per Ext. D9 terms and conditions of the chitty complainant was entitled to receive the amount which has been remitted by her with veetha palisa, 30 days after the termination of the chitty, i.e; the date of termination was on 17.03.2009. Hence on 16.04.2009 complainant was entitled to get the amount. As per Ext. P1 document the complainant has paid 46 instalments.

In the result, we find that the complainant is entitled to get the amount which has been paid by her as chitty instalments with veetha palisa after deducting the commission as on 16.04.2009. But in this case complainant did not receive the amount till date. Hence the complainant is entitled to get 9% annual interest for that amount from 16.04.2009 till the date of realisation of the amount. The opposite parties are directed to pay the amount within one month after the receipt of this order. No costs or compensation are allowed.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of September 2009.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 424/2004

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

NIL

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Photocopy of Chitty Pass Book of Chitty No. 26/00.

P2 - Copy of letter dated 30.10.2004 issued by the complainant

to 2^nd opposite party.

P3 - Copy of letter dated 30.10.2004 issued by the complainant

to 3^rd opposite party.

P4 - Copy of letter dated 30.10.2004 issued by the complainant

to 1^st opposite party.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

DW1 - Vijayan.

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

D1 - Photocopy of registered letter No. 26/00/41dated 18.08.2003 issued to the complainant.

D2 - Photocopy of Register of Department of Posts, India.

D3 - Photocopy of letter dated 02.11.2004 issued to the Head Postmaster, Post Office, Attingal.

D4 - Photocopy of letter dated 23.11.2004 issued to Head Postmaster, Post Office, Attingal.

D5 - Photocopy of letter dated 25.10.2004 issued to the complainant.

D6 - Photocopy of postal cover addressed to the complainant

D7 - Photocopy of letter dated 15.01.2005 addressed to the Branch Manager, K.S.F.E Attingal.

D8 - Proxy submitted by the complainant.

D9 - 'Variyola' of KSFE dated 24.11.2000.

PRESIDENT