28th day of October 2024
CC 556/14 filed on 30/09/2014
Complainant : Shijo Jose, S/o Mechery Veettil Jose,
Pushpagiri Desom, K.Kunnu P.O., Meloor Village.
(By Advs. Sojan Antony, M.D. Shaju etc., Thrissur)
Opposite Party : Valiyangadi Kuries Pvt. Ltd., Thrissur Road, Tana,
Irinjalakkuda, Rep. by Managing Director.
(By Adv. Patrick Davis, Irinjalakkuda)
O R D E R
By Sri. C.T. Sabu, President :
1) The facts of the case in brief are as follows:
On April 10, 2010, the complainant subscribed to the FP-03 10th day Pooval Kuri scheme with two tickets, numbered 67 and 85. During the 12th instalment, drawn on December 10, 2013, ticket number 85 was prized. However, the opposite party (OP) withheld this information from the complainant. Upon eventually learning of the prize, the complainant inquired about the procedures to claim the prize amount. The opposite party responded, asserting that despite the prize draw, the complainant had defaulted instalments of the Kuri amounts, which led to the forfeiture of the ticket, rendering the complainant ineligible for the prize amount.
The complainant states that all Kuri instalments were paid through the bank under ticket number 85, which makes the opposite party's forfeiture claim unfounded. If the ticket had indeed been forfeited, it should not have been included in the draw. Since ticket number 85 was drawn, the complainant is entitled to the prize amount. The complainant sent a lawyer notice on February 19, 2014, requesting the prize amount, to which the opposite party replied with false statements. The ticket should not have been part of the draw if it was genuinely forfeited. Given that ticket number 85 was drawn, the opposite party's withholding of the prize amount is unlawful, amounts to unfair trade practices, and should not be allowed.
In light of the above, the complainant claimed the prize amount of ₹10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakh only) from the 12th instalment, with 12% interest per annum from March 10, 2014, in addition to the cost of this complaint.
2) The Commission admitted the complaint and issued a notice to the opposite party. Upon receiving the notice, the opposite party appeared through their counsel and filed a detailed version refuting the allegations in the complaint.
The opposite party contends that the complaint is baseless and does not hold merit. The opposite party denies all allegations made in the complaint except those explicitly acknowledged. There has been no service deficiency or unfair trade practices on the part of the opposite party. According to the complainant's Kuri passbook and the notices issued for respective months, the complainant was required to pay the Kuri instalment before 3 PM. However, as of December 10, 2013, the complainant had not paid the instalments for Kuri tickets numbered 67 and 85, making this complaint premature.
The complainant cannot demand amounts contrary to the terms outlined in the Kuri passbook. Furthermore, the complainant failed to inform the opposite party about the amounts paid for the defaulted instalments. The opposite party is not obligated to acknowledge any instalment paid after the Kuri draw. Although these tickets were mistakenly included in the draw, the complainant is not entitled to the prize amount, as doing so would contradict the agreement specified in the Kuri passbook and does not constitute an unfair practice.
Additionally, the complainant had subscribed to two tickets but only cleared the defaulted instalments for one ticket after learning that their ticket had been drawn. The complainant has also withheld relevant information. Therefore, the opposite party respectfully requests that the Honourable Commission dismiss the complaint, with costs.
3) The points for consideration are as follows:
a. Is there any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice?
b. If so, what is the relief and cost?
4) When the case came for evidence, the complainant filed a proof affidavit in which they affirmed and explained all the averments in the complaint and produced five documents marked as Exts. P1 to P5. Ext. P1 is the 10th day Pooval Kuri FP 03 Pass Book issued by the opposite party to the complainant. Ext. P2 is the Statement of account of the complainant for the period from 11/12/2013 to 31/12/2013 issued by South Indian Bank, Chalakudy Branch. Ext. P3 is the copy of lawyer notice dtd. 19/02/2014 sent by the complainant to the opposite party. Ext. P4 is the Postal Receipt. Ext. P5 is the Reply Notice dtd. 04/03/2014. The complainant is cross-examined as PW1.
The opposite party also submitted their counter-proof affidavits in tune with the averments made in their version. The opposite party produced seven documents marked as Exts. R1 and R7. The depositions of the opposite party were marked as RW1 and RW2. Ext. R1 is the letter dtd. 06/07/2015 issued by South Indian Bank to the opposite party. Ext. R2 is the Personal Ledger of the complainant from 10/04/10 to 10/04/2012. Ext. R3 is the Kuri intimation. Ext. R4 is the 10th Day Pooval Kuri FP – 03 Pass Book of the complainant issued by the opposite party. Ext. R5 is the print out of Customer Ledger of the opposite party from 05/01/2011 to 07/01/2014. Ext. R6 is the print out of Customer Ledger of the opposite party from 05/01/2012 to 09/06/2016. Ext. R7 is the print out of customer ledger of the opposite party from 05/01/2012 to 09/08/16.
Statement of accounts of complainant submitted by the South Indian Bank Ltd., was marked X1 & X2.
5) Upon examining the complaint and the submissions made by both parties, the following findings and conclusions have been reached:
1. Admission of Subscription but Suppression of Material Facts :
The complainant's subscription to the Kuri scheme is undisputed. However, the complainant has withheld critical information regarding multiple defaults on the Kuri payments. Based on Ext. R2, the complainant's personal ledger, and Ext. R5, the customer ledger, it is clear that the complainant failed to meet payment obligations consistently. The ledger entries demonstrate the complainant's last recorded instalment payment was in 2012. Subsequent to this, there was a prolonged period of non-payment until the complainant resumed payments only in 2014. This extended default period constitutes a serious breach of the Kuri subscription terms and undermines the complainant's claim to entitlement for prize money.
2. Delayed Overdue Payment :
The bank transaction records are referenced in Ext. R1 further confirms that the overdue payment was only made on December 11, 2014. This delayed payment is beyond the timeframe required by the Kuri terms. The last entry of payment as per Ext. P1 was on 03/11/2011. No entry of payment seen in the Ext. P1 after 03/11/2011. The complainant has no case that he is regularly paying the kuri instalment without fail for two tickets subscribed by him. It supports the opposite party's assertion that the complainant did not comply with the payment schedule, thus forfeiting eligibility for the prize drawn.
3. Terms and Consequences of Forfeiture
As outlined under condition No.13 in Ext. P1, the Kuri passbook, and Ext. R4, the terms governing "Consequences of Forfeiture" are explicit. These terms state:
"In the case of a forfeited ticket, the subscriber concerned shall lose all benefits of dividends accrued and all other privileges attached to the ticket. However, the number comprising the ticket shall continue to remain in the lot, which, when drawn in any of the subsequent drawings, entitles the defaulter to the actual amount subscribed by him, exclusive of all dividends and less an amount of Rs. 56,000/- as a commission of the foreman. The entitled amount will be paid one month after the immediately succeeding instalment tickets on surrendering the Kuri passbook and the requisite discharge receipt."
Based on this clause, while the forfeited ticket (i.e., ticket number 85) was retained in the draw as required by the Kuri terms, the complainant's default status meant they lost the privileges of winning any prize money, including dividends and accrued benefits. The terms further specify that the complainant would only be entitled to the actual amount they had subscribed, minus foreman commission fees, provided that the Kuri passbook and discharge receipt were surrendered after the next instalment's due date. This rule highlights that the complainant's argument for full prize entitlement does not align with the governing terms, as forfeiture inherently limits their claim to only the amount actually paid up to the forfeiture point.
6) In light of the facts and evidence presented, the complainant's claim for the prize amount based on the draw of ticket number 85 is found to be without merit due to non-compliance with the terms of the Kuri scheme, multiple defaults, and forfeiture. The opposite party acted within the framework of the Kuri agreement, and no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice has been established on their part.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed.
Needless to mention, the dismissal of this complaint is without prejudice to the rights, the complainant is otherwise entitled to under clause 13 of Ext. P1, Kuri Pass Book.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 28th day of October 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
Sreeja S. Ram Mohan R C. T. Sabu
Member Member President
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits :
Ext. P1 10th day Pooval Kuri FP 03 Pass Book issued by the opposite party to
the complainant.
Ext. P2 Statement of account of the complainant for the period from 11/12/2013
to 31/12/2013 issued by South Indian Bank, Chalakudy Branch.
Ext. P3 copy of lawyer notice dtd. 19/02/2014 sent by the complainant to the
opposite party.
Ext. P4 Postal Receipt.
Ext. P5 Reply Notice dtd. 04/03/2014
Complainant’s Witnesses :
PW1 Shijo Jose
Opposite party’s Exhibits :
Ext. R1 letter dtd. 06/07/2015 issued by South Indian Bank to the opposite
party.
Ext. R2 Personal Ledger of the complainant from 10/04/10 to 10/04/2012.
Ext. R3 Kuri intimation.
Ext. R4 10th Day Pooval Kuri FP – 03 Pass Book of the complainant issued by
the opposite party.
Ext. R5 print out of Customer Ledger of the opposite party from 05/01/2011 to
07/01/2014.
Ext. R6 print out of Customer Ledger of the opposite party from 05/01/2012 to
09/06/2016.
Ext. R7 print out of customer ledger of the opposite party from 05/01/2012 to
09/08/16.
Opposite party’s Witnesses :
RW1 Biju Paul
RW2 Suraj
RW3 Jose Joseph
X1 & X2. Statement of accounts of complainant submitted by the South Indian Bank Ltd.,
Id/-
President
