State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M.P.Muhammad vs Manager,Gokulam Chits on 22 January, 2015
Daily Order KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL NO.40/2013 JUDGMENT DATED 12/02/2015 (Appeal filed against the order in CC No.436/2008 on the file of CDRF, Kozhikode dated, 12/09/2012) PRESENT: SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER
SHRI. K. CHANDRADAS NADAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SANTHAMMA THOMAS : MEMBER
APPELLANT:
M.P. Muhammed, S/o. Abdul Khadar Musaliar,
Madathil Peedikayil House, Natakkuthazha Village,
Vatakara Taluk, Kozhikode District.
(By Adv: G.S. Kalkura)
Vs
RESPONDENTS:
The Manager, M/s. Gokulam Chits &
Finance Co.(P) Ltd., Regd. Office, Chennai,
Pin-600 004.
The Manager,
Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd.,
19/320, Kannans Building, Narayana Nagaram,
Vatakara-673 101, Kozhikode District.
JUDGMENT
SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER
Dis-satisfied by the order passed in C.C.No.436/08 on the file of CDRF, Kozhikode the complainant came up in appeal.
2. It is the case of the complainant that he subscribed 11 chits amounting to Rs.22 Lakhs and all the chits were priced with a discount of 25% thereby the complainant received Rs.16,50,000/-. It is alleged in the complaint that he is entitled to get dividend for the prized chits. The complainant subscribed further 3 chits in order to transfer the amount to entitle for dividend for the defaulted chits. The amounts against 3 chits were transferred to the other earlier chits subscribed by the complainant. As such the complainant had not paid any money under the 3 chits. It is the definite case of complainant that he joined the 3 chits amounting to Rs.10 Lakhs was in order to facilitate him to receive dividend for the prized chits. The complainant dis-continued to pay the chits as the opposite parties had not paid any dividend due to him in the chits subscribed by him. The complainant claimed the dividend of Rs.4,48,000/- out of which he received only Rs.2,50,409/- making a short fall of Rs.1,97,591/-. The complainant also claims the refund of Rs.25,000/- paid against the 3 chits which were dis-continued by the complainant on account of the violation by the opposite parties to pay dividend for the chits subscribed by him. A complaint was pending before the arbitrator against the complainant. The opposite parties also accepted 4 blank cheques from the complainant and one blank cheque numbering 268085 was used to file a cheque case against the complainant before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore. The complainant alleges deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and filed the complaint for Rs.3 Lakhs and cost of the proceedings.
3. It is contended by the opposite parties in the version that the Consumer Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Under the chits Act the complainant is bound to approach the appropriate authority, the arbitrator. The complainant was a defaulter in the prized chits. The complainant prized all the 11 chits for a bid amount of 25% less of the Sala value of each chit. It is admitted that the opposite party paid an amount of Rs.6,50,000/- towards the full ticket amount for all the chits. A subscriber is entitled to get dividend for monthly instalments only on payment of the chit instalments in time. The defaulter of chit is not entitled for the dividend and it will be forfeited. The complainant was a defaulter in payment of instalments in all the prized chits. Hence he is liable to pay the full instalments to the opposite parties in all the prized chits in which the amounts received by him. The complainant joined further 3 chits at his own will. It is on the written request made by the complainant that the amounts were transferred and adjusted to the defaulted chits. The dividends in all his prompt payments were given to the complainant. The Foreman's Commission is 5% of the total Sala value and as such the amount was adjusted towards the Foreman's Commission. It is also not possible to give dividend in defaulted instalments as per the chitty rules. There is no balance amount to be adjusted towards Foreman's Commission as alleged by the complainant. The arbitration case was instituted to get defaulted amount from the complainant and the complainant is at liberty to contest the case before the arbitrator as per the chitty regulations. It is admitted that a cheque bearing No.268085 for Rs.3,23,236/- was issued by the complainant to discharge complainant's legally enforceable debt due to the opposite party. The said cheque was returned unpaid for insufficient funds and the opposite parties have no other way than to file a case under Section 138 of NI Act. There is no deficiency on the part of opposite parties and the complaint is only to be dismissed. The complainant has deliberately concealed the material fact and filed the complaint.
4. The evidence consisted of the oral testimony of complainant as PW1 and documents were marked as Exbt.A1 to A14 and on the part of opposite party RW1 was examined and Exbt: B1 to B32 were marked.
5. On hearing the parties and on going through the records, we find that it is an admitted fact that the complainant had subscribed several chits run by opposite parties. It is clear from documents that the complainant prized all chits. The total Sala amount was Rs.22 Lakhs out of which the complainant received the bidding amount of 25% less which comes to Rs.16,50,000/-. It is the allegation of the complainant that no dividend was given for the chits. The contention of the opposite party is that the complainant was a defaulter in payment of the instalments of the chits and he is not entitled for the dividend for the defaulted instalments. The complainant joined 3 more chits and that amount was adjusted towards the defaulted chits. As per the Chit Act against the defaulted payment the subscriber is not entitled for dividend. Hence the amount from the 4 chits adjusted only to defaulted instalments. As per rules the Foreman is entitled for 5% Foreman Commission and it is also in evidence that the complainant paid the 1st instalments of 3 chits and thereafter defaulted the payment. Hence the opposite party adjusted the payments towards the Foreman Commission and no amount is due as balance dividend to the complainant. It is also evident that the complainant issued a cheque for Rs.3,23,236/- towards the legally enforceable debt and the said cheque was returned unpaid for the reason 'insufficient fund' and had to proceed under Section 138 of NI Act against the complainant. It is clear from the documents produced by the respondent that the complainant was a defaulter in making timely instalments and he is not entitled for the dividend for defaulted instalments. The complainant had already received the amount of Rs.75,000/- and Rs.70,950/- dated 05/06/1999 and 31/05/1999 towards the adjusted amount and the amount was already accepted by the complainant which was not mentioned in the complaint. It is clear from the deposition of PW1 that as he was not in receipt of dividend he defaulted the instalments. It is also clear from documents and from evidence that the complainant was a defaulter in payment of instalments and as per chit Act a defaulter is not entitled for dividend.
In the result, appeal is dismissed and we uphold the order passed by the Forum Below.
The office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Forum below along with LCR.
A. RADHA : MEMBER
K. CHANDRADAS NADAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
SANTHAMMA THOMAS : MEMBER
Sa.
KERALA STATE CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPEAL NO.40/2013
JUDGMENT DATED 12/02/2015
Sa.