TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HYDERABAD
K. Ranga Rao, Member-(J) and
R.S. Rajeshree, Member (N-J)
M. Nagamalleshwar Rao – Complainant
versus
M/s. Neeladri Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. – Opp. Party
C.C. No.108 of 2016
Decided on 10.5.2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 17 – Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 47 – Services – Chit Funds – Dismissal of complaint – concealment of facts – What can be inferred from the dates is that the complainant after passing of the Arbitration Award, in pursuance of the compliance of the Award had executed Ex.B5 Bank Voucher and after a lapse of 2 years came up with the present complaint. There is no rebuttal evidence filed by the complainant to the Exs.B2 to B5 filed by the opposite party; that apart there is no whisper in the evidence affidavit or in the written arguments of the complainant with regard to the documents filed by the opposite party. The evidence affidavit and written arguments are nothing but a replica of the complaint. The silence of the complainant amounts to admission and indicates that concealing these facts the complainant has filed the present complaint. Therefore, having executed Exs.B2 & B5, the complainant is estopped from claiming the chit amount. It is not the case of the complainant that the Exs.B2 to B5 are created documents, nor it is his case that Exs.B2 and B5 were not signed by him. When the opposite party has come up with such documentary evidence, the burden shifts on the complainant to disprove the same, which has not been done by the complainant – Thus, the complaint is an after thought of executing Ex B2 & B5 – Complaint dismissed. [Paras 2 to 9].
Result: Complaint dismissed.
ORDER
R.S. Rajeshree, Member-Non-Judicial—This is a complaint filed by the Complainant u/s. 17(1)(a)(i) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on 14.6.2016 against the opposite party to direct it as follows:—
i. To pay the bid amount covered under the chit series no.20L-3LP/9 with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of auction;
ii. To pay damages of Rs.2,00,000/- for causing mental agony to the complainant; and
iii. To pay Rs.5,000/- towards costs.
2. The brief facts of the case are:
The complainant became a chit member in chit series no.20L-3LP/9 being run by the opposite party for an amount of Rs.20 lakhs which is payable in 40 instalments @ Rs.50,000/- per month after foregoing the dividend amount. The said chit commenced on 31.3.2011 and he had paid the instalments by way of cheque or cash regularly without there being any default; that on 24.6.2014 he has become a successful bidder and as per the agreement, the opposite party was supposed to deduct commission of Rs.1 lakh and to pay Rs.19 lakhs to the complainant; that he had completed all the formalities and signed on all the documents as per the directions of the opposite party, but till date the opposite party had not paid the chit amount of Rs.19 lakhs. But in a statement dt.30.6.2014 the opposite party had stated that the payment was made under receipt no.12823 to 12826 through cheque nos.RT151471 to RT151473 and RT152845 dt.28.5.2014 drawn on CUB; that inspite of completion of the said chit and fulfilling all the requirements, the opposite party had not paid the chit amount. As such, the complainant got issued a legal notice on 6.11.2014 asking to pay the chit amount along with interest, compensation for the suffering met by the complainant. The opposite party had given a reply to the said legal notice on 20.11.2014 through their counsel with all false allegations to which the complainant had given rejoinder on 2.12.2014. Inspite of the same, the opposite party had not paid the chit amount; that the complainant has been visiting the opposite party office regularly but the opposite party had been dragging the matter on one or the other pretext; that the complainant doing the poultry business and is in dire need of chit amount for development of business. But as the opposite party failed to pay the chit amount, the complainant had suffered huge loss in his business and had also suffered severe hardship and mental agony. Therefore, filed the present complaint seeking chit amount of Rs.19 lakhs with interest along with compensation and costs.
3. The opposite party filed their written version while admitting that the complainant was a successful bidder for the chit series no.20L-3LP/9 and further agreed the chit amount, duration of the chit, instalments, dividend entitled to the opposite party, but however denied that the complainant was regular in payment of the subscription amount and had pleaded that the complainant had defaulted certain instalments; further opposed the complaint on the ground that the complainant had requested the opposite party to adjust the chit amount towards the dues in the other chits where he stood as guarantor by signing all the necessary documents and also towards the balance to be paid in the chit pertaining to the complainant himself. In view of such undertaking given by the complainant, the opposite
party had adjusted an amount of Rs.19 lakhs payable to the complainant in the following manner:—
• An amount of Rs.4,32,875/- was adjusted towards the subject chit of the complainant towards the defaulted payments;
• An amount of Rs.8,40,000/- was adjusted towards chit series bearing no.30L-1MT/24 standing in the name of Thirupathaiah Poultry Farm wherein the complainant stood as guarantor vide receipt no.RT/151472 and as per the Arbitration Award dated 11.11.2013 in Arbitration/CF No.249/2013;
• An amount of Rs.4,27,000/- was adjusted towards chit bearing no.20L-3LP/12 standing in the name of Mr. Shing Rao G. wherein the complainant stood as
(1) Chit amount – having executed Exs. B2 & B5, the complainant is estopped from claiming the chit amount.(2) Documentary Evidence – When the opposite party has come up with such documentary evidence....
(1) Proof of Deductions – A Chit Fund Company cannot unilaterally deduct charges for “Surety Verification” or “GST” from a prized amount unless they provide concrete evidence or contractual justifica....
Power of National Commission to review under Section 21 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is limited to cases where some prima facie error appears in impugned order.
Consumer forums have jurisdiction in disputes involving chit fund operators, and failure to fulfill obligations pertains to deficiency of service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.