Back
BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION:HYDERABAD
FA NO.73/2019 AGAINST ORDER'IN Cc No.17/2014 ON THE
FILE OF DISTRICT FORUM, RANGA REDDY.
Between
Dandu Krishna Murthy Raju,
S/o.D.Venkata Raju, Aged about 70 years,
R/o.8-3-167/30, Flat # 201, Erragadda,
Hyderabad -
18. ..Appellant/
Complainant
And
The Branch Manager,
Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd.,
Located at Habsiguda,
Hyderabad.
..Respondent/
Opposite party
Counsel for the Appellant
Party in Person
Counsel for the Respondent
Mr.K.Vijayender Reddy
Hon'ble Sri Justice M.S.K. Jaiswal, President.
And
CORAM
Hon'ble Smt. Meena Ramanathan, Lady Member
FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER,
TWO THOUSAND TWENTY ONE
Order:
This is an
filed by the appellant/complainant u/s.15 of
1. appeal
Consumer Protection Act,1986 against the order dt.27.11.2018
of the Dist.
Consumer Forum, Rangareddy
made in C.c.No.17/2014.
The appellant is the
complainant
and
respondent is the
opposite
party in C.C.No. 17/2014.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in
the complaint.
3. The brief facts of the case as set out in the complaint are as follows:
i.e. FHKT- 03P-21
The Complainant joined as a member in 2 vacant chits
The
8 FHKT- 01R-47 of opposite party chit fund company on 6.5.2011.
towards vacant
opposite party
collected Rs.7,425/-
and Rs.11,550/
charges
for the said chits, without the consent of the complainant.
The
opposite party has also collected penalty of Rs.9,960/- for Chit No.FHKT-03P-
21 and Rs.16,260/- for FHKT
-
01R-47. Though
the complainant's wife is
Hence the
agent for the said two chits, bonus commission was not paid.
complainant issued notice dt.19.9.2013 to the opposite party, for which no
response was given.
Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite
party,
the complainant approached the District Forum to direct the opposite
party
to refund
the vacant charges of Rs.18,975/-
with 18% interest, to
relund
excess penalty charges
of Rs.26,176/-
with 18% interest, to pay
Rs.2,500/- towards incentive
to
the complainant's wife,
to pay
compensation of Rs.30,000/- and to pay Rs.5000/- towards costs.
4. The opposite party filed written version denying the allegations made in
the complaint and contending that as per the Clause 64 of the amended Chit
Fund Act, the dispute relating to the chit business shall be referred by any of
the parties to the dispute, to the Registrar for Arbitration whose decision shall
be final and no Forum, Authority or Civil Court are having any jurisdiction to
decide the cases. The opposite party submits that if the chit subscriber opts
to join at a later
stage by making part payment/ full payment of the
instalments at a time in such an event the opposite party gives a benefit of
allowing the dividend accrued on the completed instalments as on the date of
joining the chit and collect 10% towards vacant charges on the quantum of
dividend allowed
to the subscribers i.e. the late joining subscribers will get
benefit 90% of the quantum of dividend.
The opposite party submits that
they have collected only a meagre amount of Rs. 18,975/- towards vacant
charges and
the complainant
benefitted
an amount of Rs.2,03,704/-
towards the dividend.
The opposite party further submits that the complaint is liable to be
dismissed
on the ground of limitation
as the complainant joined into the
alleged chits in the year
2011 and the present complaint
is filed in
January,2014
i.e after 4 years of the cause of action.
The opposite party
finally submits that there is no deficiency in service and prayed to dismiss the
complaint.
5. Before the District Forum the complainant filed his evidence affidavit and
Exs.A1 to A4 are marked on his behalf. Evidence affidavit of Mr.M.Vinay Sagar
Reddy-ADM
of opposite party Chit Fund Co. as RW.1
filed.
6. The District Forum after hearing both sides and perusing the material
on record, dismissed
