BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

PRESENT

MR. K.B. SANGANNAVAR                : JUDICIAL MEMBER

MRS. DIVYASHREE M.                    : MEMBER

Appeal No. 125/2021

O R D E R

BY MR. K.B. SANGANNAVAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This is an appeal filed by complainant under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 in C.C.No. 419/2018 aggrieved by the order dated 20.10.2020 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mysore. 

2. The Commission heard Learned Counsels and examined the impugned order.
3. The Commission dismissed the complaint raised by complainant.  The complainant has raised consumer complaint against respondent herein.  The commission below recorded reasons in paragraph 11 if at all complainant could have offered satisfactory surety to the satisfaction of OP, OP would have definitely released the price amount of Rs.4,07,500/- to the complainant.  But, facts remain that complainant had regularly paid the installment from December 2014 to May 2017, which amounts to Rs.2,44,030/- and it is still held by the OP and to that effect forum below has failed to exercise its powers keeping in view of the object of the Consumer Law.  In this regard Learned Counsel for appellant would submit that as per Section 21 of Chit Funds Act the security that could be sought by OPs is only for 1/3 of the balance subscriptions which comes around security of Rs.50,000/-.  Further would submit that Section 30 of the Chit Funds Act stipulates that,

“(1) A foreman shall, out of the amounts payable by and realized from the substituted subscriber towards the installments relatable to the period before the date of the substitution (including the arrears due from the defaulting subscriber), deposit, before the date of the next succeeding installment, in a separate identifiable account in an approved bank mentioned in the chit agreement, an amount equal to the contributions made by the defaulting subscriber less such deductions as may be provided for in the chit agreement, and shall inform the defaulting subscriber as well as the Registrar of the fact of such deposit and shall not withdraw the amount so deposited except for payment to the defaulting subscriber.

(2) The amount so deposited under sub-section (1) shall be paid to the defaulting subscriber as and when he claims the amount and the amount so deposited shall not be withdrawn by the foreman for any purpose other than for such payment.

(3) The contributions of any defaulting subscriber who has not been substituted till the termination of the chit shall be paid to him within fifteen days from the date of termination of the chit subject to such deductions as may be provided for in the chit agreement.”

4. Thus, the above provisions of law were not at all considered by the forum below. In such circumstances, although Commission is of the view to remand matter back to the Commission below for reconsideration of these vital aspects, facts remain that eligibility to claim Rs.4,75,000/- is already gone and the remaining relief which could be awardable is to refund Rs.2,44,030/- held by OPs, as such justice would be meet to the consumer complainant to consider the said relief to resolve the dispute.  In such view, we proceed to allow this appeal.  Accordingly, set aside the impugned order dated 20.10.2020 passed in C.C.No.419/2018 by District Commission, Mysore.  Consequently, directed OP to refund Rs.2,44,030/- along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realisation.  The OP is directed to comply with this direction wi