Back
Appeal No. 150312013
Filed on: 27.09.2013
Disposed on: 17.12.201 5
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION , BANGALORE.
PRESENT
HON,BLE MTs. JUSTICE B.S. INDRAKALA : PRESIDENT
Mr. B.S. TADAHAL
: JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs. G.T. VIJAYALAKSHMI
MEMBER
M/s. Kapil Chits (K) hrt. Ltd.
No. 12-1-28l89, SKP Complex
Poornima Talkies
Raj endra Gunj Roaci, Raichur
Rep. by its Legal Officer T- Prasad
Appellant
(By Sri. K.S, Bharath Kumar)
v/s
Sri. Earanna S/o. Hanumanthappa
R/o. Hanumanthappa
R/o. H.No. 6-l-44, Thimmapur pet
Raichur
......Respondent
(By Sri. Ravi T.N.)
ORDER
Mrs. JUSTICE B.S. INDRAKALA
PRESIDENT
The above appeal is preferred chatlenging the order dated
08.08.20013 passed in Consumer Complaint No. 12/2013 on the
file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raichur.
2. For the sake of convenience the parties herein are referred
to by their respective rank as arrayed before the District Forum.
tt$P-
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015
Appep-l No.1503/2013
3. It is the case of the complainant that he was the subscriber
and member of the chit No. RRTO1G103 for a sum of
Rs.2,50,000/- which is run by the OP chits and he paid monthly
instalments of Rs. 5,000/- regularly since March 2009 and in all
subscribed Rs. 75,000/-. Furt-her it is alteged that subsequently
due to domestic and financial problems he was unable to
subscribe further instalments; however, intending to celebrate
the marriage of his daughter he asked the OP to refund said sum
of Rs. 75,000/- along with monthly dividend and interest till
date, but, the OP failed to pay the amount and as such he got
issued legal notice dated 26.12.2012; inspite of service of said
notice OP neither complied with the demands made therein nor
replied the same; hence, lodged the complaint seeking
appropriate reliefs.
4. The OP entered appearance on seryice of notice, but, neither
5. The District Forum considering the pleadings, evidence led
1n by the complainant deemed it fit to allow the complaint
directing the appellant herein to pay the said sum of
Rs. 75,000/- with interest at the rate of 60/o p.a. from the date of
2
complaint till realization.
tro'
AppealNo. 1503/2013
version was filed nor adduced evidence.
J
AppealNo. 1503/2013
6. Being aggrieved by the said orders the OP is in appeal
interalia contending amongst other grounds that due to the
resignation of the Legal Officer of the Company who was in
charge of the Company, objections could not be filed in the
matter; the respondent/complainant was one of the guarantors
to the chit bearing No. RRL 01 G 33 and the subscriber in the
said chit became defaulter; according to clause VI 2(d) of the Chit
Agreement entered into by the respondent/appellant if the
subscriber is a surety to any prized subscriber who is a defaulter,
the amount paid by such subscriber either for non-prized chits or
deposits will be foreclosed by the foreman and the amount wilt be
adjusted towards the defaulted subscriptions of such prized
subscriber, with or without prior notice to such subscriber as
this subscriber is jointly and severally liable to such debts. It is
further contended by the appellant / OP that the amount paid by
the complainant
was adjusted towards defaulter's payment;
hence, impugned order is not sustainable; thus, seeks to allow
the appeal by setting aside of the impugned order.
7. Heard the arguments of both the counsel for appellant as
well as respondent.
W
Appeal No. 150312013
8. Thus, the subscription to chit bearing No. RRTO1G103 by
the respondent and his contribution of Rs. 75,000/- towards the
same is not in dispute. At the same time it is also not in dispute
that the complainant stood as a surety to another subscriber of
chit bearing No. RRLO 1G33.
9. No doubt clause VI 2(d) of the Chit Agreement entered into
between the complainant and OP is also not disputed,
nevertheless, such regulations are subject to the Chit Funds Act
1982. As per Section 33 of the Chit Funds Act 1982 a foreman
shall not be enti
