State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Mr.Rakshit M Shah, S/O Sri Mahendra K ... vs 1. M/S Mahavir Chit Funds & Finance And ... on 5 February, 2014
BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD F.A.No.225 OF 2013 AGAINST C.C.NO. 838 OF 2010 DISTRICT FORUM-III HYDERABAD Between: Mr.Rakshit M Shah, S/o Sri Mahendra K Shah R/o H.No.4-2-372, Moti Singh Lane, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad-095 Appellant/complainant A N D 1. M/s Mahavir Chit Funds & Finance rep. by Ms Rita J Vora, B-1/2(A) Narsapur Cross Road, Balanagar Hyderabad-37, and also at B-131/4, Narsapur Cross Road Balanagar, Hyderabad-37 2. Mrs Rita J Vora W/o Jitendra D.Vora R/o Flat No.304, 3-4-215/A, R.K.Complex Kachiguda, Hyderabad 3. Mr.Jitendra D Vora R/o Flat No.3-4-215/A and also at M/s Mahavir Auto Spare, 6-33/4&5 Balaji Mansion, Kukatpally, Hyd. Respondents/opposite parties Counsel for the Appellant M/s Shireen Sethna Baria Counsel for the Respondents Held sufficient QUORUM: SRI R.LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO, HONBLE MEMBER
AND SRI THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HONBLE MEMBER WEDNESDAY THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND FOURTEEN Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) ***
1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. The appellant filed complaint claiming the amount of `1,30,917/- with interest @24% p.a. and a sum of `50,000/- towards compensation for suffering mental agony and costs.
2. The appellant joined in the chit group with the respondents for the chit value of `1,00,00-/- and the monthly subscription payable for the chit is `5,000/- in duration of 20 months. The chit terminated in February, 2007 and the appellant paid all the 20 instalments and received the chit amount of `95,000/- from the respondents. The appellant had joined another chit in the month of May 2007 for the chit value of `1,00,000/- and the monthly subscription payable for the chit is `5000/-. The chit was commenced on 24.4.2007 and would be terminated in the month of November 2008. The appellant had stated that he paid all the 20 instalments for an amount of `95,000/-. The respondents even after completion of the total subscription amount failed to pay the chit amount. The appellant got issued notice dated 6.5.2010 to the respondents claiming the amount of `1,30,917/-
with interest, compensation and costs.
3. The respondent no.3 filed counter which was adopted by the respondents no.1 and 2 and contended that the appellant had not paid the instalments in time and the respondents no.1 and 2 are no way concerned with the chit transaction of the appellant. The respondent no.3 suffered heavy financial loss and as such demanded for the payment with regard to the subscription amount from the appellant.
The appellant is not a consumer and the complaint is not maintainable.
4. The appellant filed his affidavit and the documents, ExA1 to A7 and the respondent no.3 filed his affidavit and they did not chose to file any documents.
5. The District Forum dismissed the complaint on the premise that the appellant failed to prove that he is subscriber of the chit conducted by the respondent no.1 chit fund company and the District Forum observed that mere deducting amounts from the savings bank account of the appellant is not sufficient to hold that the appellant is subscriber of the chit.
6. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the District Forum the complainant has filed appeal contending that the District Forum decided two issues out of three issues in his favour and erroneously held that he is not subscriber despite the admission of the respondents thereof. It is contended that the District Forum failed to consider the documentary evidence adduced by the appellant and the District Forum failed to consider Section 58 of the Evidence Act and the purpose and object of the C.P. Act.
7. The point for consideration is whether the order of the District Forum is vitiated by misappreciation of fact or law?
8. The respondents questioned maintainability of the complaint on the premise of the provisions of Chit Fund Act. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is a consumer and the cases relating to the dispute of chit fund fall within the jurisdiction of Consumer Forum. The District Forum on application of law laid in the judgment reported in AIR 2004 AP 343 upheld contention of the of the appellant. The respondents have not raised any objection in the appeal nor did they prefer appeal on the finding returned in this regard, by the District Forum. Thus, the plea of jurisdiction is no more an issue in the appeal.
9. The appellant has stated that the respondent no.3 who is representative of the respondent no.1 company requested him to join as member of the chit conducted by the respondent no.1 company and on being impressed by the representation of the respondent no.3, he subscribed to the chit conducted by the respondent no.1 and the period of chit is 20 months as also subscription of the chit is `5,000/- for the chit value of `1,00,000/-.
10. The respondents have not denied the duration, subscription and value of the chit as stated by the appellant. The appellant has submitted that the chit term was completed in February 2007 and he received the chit value of `95,000/-
and thereafter he subscribed to another chit in the month of May 2007 and the duration of chit is 20 months, its subscription is of `5,000/- and the chit value is `1,00,000/- as also that the chit was commenced on 24.4.2007.
11. Thus, there has been no dispute as to the appellants subscription to the chit which was completed in the year February 2007.
Insofar as another chit which was commenced in 24.4.2007, the appellant has submitted that he paid regularly the subscription by means of cheque and the payment towards subscription is reflected in his savings bank account statement with Bank of India, Secunderabad Branch. The respondents have not denied the appellants subscription for the chit and in fact the respondent no.3 made a categorical admission in this regard. He has stated :
I submit that the complainant has never paid the monthly installments in time. The complainant has paid the installments irregularly due to which I suffered heavy financial loss and he has to pay the chit amount to other subscribers by paying interest. I submit that due to default in payment by other prized subscribers, I suffered heavy financial loss and I could not pay the amount to its members in time
12. The statement of account of the appellant issued by the Bank of India, Secunderabad goes to show the debiting of amount on various dates which is shown below:
24.04.2007 Rs.5,000/-
25.05.2007 Rs.5,000/-
22.06.2007 Rs.3,750/-
10.07.2007 Rs.3,750/-
24.08.2007 Rs.3,750/-
08.10.2007 Rs.3,750/-
30.10.2007 Rs.4,000/-
28.11.2007 Rs.4,050/-
27.12.2007 Rs.4,140/-
29.01.2008 Rs.4,240/-
20.02.2008 Rs.4,300/-
18.03.2008 Rs.4,350/-
23.04.2008 Rs.4,400/-= 27.05.2008 Rs.4,550/-
19.06.2008 Rs.4,600/-
23.07.2008 Rs.4,600/-
25.08.2008 Rs.4,750/-
14.10.2008 Rs.4,800/-
21.10.2008 Rs.4,950/-
28.11.2008 Rs.4,995/-
Total Rs.87,725
13. The respondent no.1 issued demand notice claiming a sum of `4,790/-
which is the amount obtained after deducting dividend of `2,010/- from the monthly subscription of RS.5,000/- for the month of January 2008 in respect of the chit No.MCF(20).
14. There is no denying the fact that the chit has commenced on 24.4.2007 and after a period of 20 months the chit period was completed in the month of December 2008. The appellant got issued notice dated 06.05.2010 claiming a sum of `25,000/- towards chit amount with interest @ 24% per annum thereon.
15. A combined reading of the statement of account and the notice coupled with the statement of the appellant, notice, unclinchingly establish the appellants subscription to the chit bearing No.MCF(20) and payment of subscription of `95,000/- which include dividend offered by the respondents. Thus, the respondents are liable to pay `95,000/- i.e., the chit value of `1,00,000/- minus the foremans commission of `5,000/-. The respondents have not shown any reason for their failure to pay the amount to the appellant even after completion of the chit period which constitute deficiency in service on their part. As such the order of the District Forum is liable to be set aside.
16. For the foregoing reasons, this Commission has come to conclusion that the respondents are liable to pay an amount of `95,000/-
with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of termination of the chit period i.e., 1.12.2008 till payment. The interest awarded from the date of completion of the chit period would take care of the relief sought for as to compensation.
17. In the result the appeal is allowed setting aside the order of the District Forum. Consequently the complaint is allowed directing the respondents no.1 to 3/opposite parties no.1 to 3 to pay to the appellant/complainant an amount of `95,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from 1.12.2008 till payment together with costs of `5,000/-. Time for compliance four weeks.
MEMBER MEMBER Dt.05.02.2014 కె.ఎం.కె.*