Complainant 1. Athaulla, S/o Late Hafeez, 2. Smt.Tabasum Taj, W/o Athaulla, Both are R/at D.No.104, Bannimantap, ‘C’ Layout, Mysore-570015. (By Sri.Shivakumara, Advocate)

Vs.

Opposite Party Foreman / Managing Director, Mookambika Chits Pvt. Ltd., No.18, APMC Shopping Complex, Sheshadri Iyer Road, Mysore. (By Sri.G.S.Venkatachalapathy, Advocate)

Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service Date of filing of complaint : 04.02.2009 Date of appearance of O.P. : 02.03.2009 Date of order : 08.04.2009 Duration of Proceeding : 1 MONTH 6 DAYS PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER Sri.D.Krishnappa, President


1. The grievance of the complainants in brief against the opposite party is, that they had subscribed to a chit transaction with opposite party for Rs.25,00,000/- for 25 months on a monthly subscription of Rs.1,00,000/-. That they paid subscriptions commencing from 01.06.2007 up to 07.10.2008. The business that was done by the first complainant had fallen, therefore he could not pay the monthly subscription subsequent to 07.10.2008. Then they requested the opposite party to pay the accrued amount amounting to Rs.10,02,118/-, but opposite party instead of paying the said amount has only paid Rs.7,60,000/- by deducting Rs.2,42,118/- without giving any particulars of deduction. A legal notice was issued on 29.12.2008, but was of no use and therefore has prayed for a direction to the opposite party to pay the balance chit amount of Rs.2,42,118/- and to award compensation and cost.


2. The opposite party has appeared through his advocate and filed version admitting the transaction but contended that when the complainants approached them informing their unwillingness to continue the chit transaction, they calculated the amount payable to them, for which the complainants accepted the calculation and the amount payable to them and despite accepting that amount have come up with this complaint, therefore stating that the complainants are estopped from claiming further amount, has further stated that because of discontinuation of the subscription by the complainants, they have suffered financial burden, shortened the period of chit effecting the transaction and thereby contending that they have deducted the amount in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract and denying their liability has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.


3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the complainants and opposite party have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainants have produced a copy of the passbook issued by the opposite party and copy of the legal notice. The opposite party has produced chit agreement and receipt for having paid chit amount due to the complainant. Heard the counsel for both the parties and perused the records.


4. On the above contentions, following points for determination arise. 1. Whether the complainant proves that the opposite party has caused deficiency in his service in not paying the full chit subscribed amount? 2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?


5. Our findings are as under:- Point no.1 : In the Negative. Point no.2 : See the final order.



REASONS


6. Point no. 1:- As evident from the contentions of both the parties, the complainants become subscribers to a chit transaction and because of their own reasons discontinued the payment of subscription towards the chit and applied for refund of the accrued amount from the opposite party. The opposite party by relying upon the terms and conditions of the chit agreement and also Chit Funds Act has paid Rs.7,60,000/- by deducting a sum of Rs.2,42,118/-.



7. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant argued that the opposite party has not given the details of deduction and the opposite party has arbitrarily deducted the amount, which is not justifiable and therefore submitted for the relief as prayed for. Whereas the counsel appearing for the opposite party invited our attention to chit agreement entered into between the complainants and opposite party and the conditions of the agreement. Under the heading of Non-prized subscriber, it is stated if a non-prized subscriber fails to pay the 3 consecutive monthly installments is liable to be removed from the list of subscribers. The Foreman at his option, may substitute a new subscriber in the place of defaulting subscriber or himself subscribe to that ticket, and the conditions further laid down that the removed subscriber is entitled to the amount actually subscribed by him, excluding the dividend and 5% of the chit amount towards the damages for the breach of contract. Rest is omitted has not relevant. It is therefore clear in the case on hand that the complainants for their own reasons discontinued the subscription and committed defaulters. That being so, under the conditions of the agreement, the complainants are entitled for actual subscribed money excluding dividend and 5% of the chit amount towards the damages for breach of contract. The opposite party pressing these conditions, claimed to have deducted a sum of Rs.2,42,118/- and that is in our view is in accordance with the provisions of the Chit Funds Act. The complainants being party to this agreement are bound by the conditions and therefore they cannot escape from the same.



8. In the course of arguments, it was roughly worked out that what has been deducted by the opposite party has been done in accordance with law and they have not committed any breach of agreement. We, in this regard rely upon a decision reported in III (2008) CPJ 72 NC between Model Chit Crop Ltd. and others Vs. Dr.Meera. Wherein the Hon’ble National Commission besides holding that matter fall under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act has held that the removed subscriber is entitled to the amount actually subscribed exclusive of dividend less 5% chit fund amount towards the breach of contract. Therefore, considering the grievance of the complainant from any angle, it cannot be said that the opposite party has caused deficiency in their service. As the result, we answer point no.1 in the negative and hold that the complaint is liable to be dismissed and therefore we pass the following order:-


ORDER 1. The Complaint is dismissed.