DATE OF FILING : 24/10/16

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES  REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 27th day of April  2018

Present :

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR PRESIDENT

           SRI. BENNY. K. MEMBER

CC NO. 298/16

Between

Complainant       :  Baburaj S., S/o T.K. Sivankutty,

                                                                            Thenganal House,

                                                                             Edavetty P.O.,

                                                                             Thodupuzha.

(By Adv: K.M.Sanu)

And

Opposite Party                                          :1. The Branch Manager,

                                                                           KSFE Limited,

                                                                           Thodupuzha Main Branch,

                                                                           Pulimoottil Plaza, Thodupuzha.   

                                                                      2 . The Managing Director,

                                                                            KSFE Head Office,

                                                                            Bhadratha, Musium Road,

                                                                            Thrissur – 20

                                                                           (Both by Adv: Babu Sebastian)

                                                                      3 . The Deputy Thahasildar (RR),

                                                                            KSFE, Kottayam P.O.,

                                                                            Kottayam.

                                                                       4 . The Village Officer,

                                                                            Karikkodu Village,

                                                                            Edavetty P.O.,

                                                                            Thodupuzha.

 

O R D E R

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)

 

     The case  of the complainant is that,  

 

         Complainant was the subscriber of  chit having  No.26/12 A15.  Whereas the first opposite party was the foreman.  This chit was for Rs. 1 Lakh and duration was 25 months, monthly instalment was Rs.4000/-, starting from 25/07/12 to 25/07/14 and the complainant remitted the first instalment and in the  first  itself  the  chit  was  prized  to  him  for  an  amount  of   Rs. 70,000/-.  

                                                                                                                      (Cont........2)

-2-

For getting the chit amount complainant submitted the LIC Policy of his wife as security with the consent of the first opposite party.  The first opposite party forwarded this LIC policy to the LIC Pune office for confirmation but  it was not returned.  After waiting a period of one month the complainant approached the opposite  party  for getting the chit amount.  At that time the first opposite party replied that the LIC policy was not returned from the LIC office Pune.  Thereafter the complainant approached the first opposite party so many times for getting back the LIC policy or chit amount.  But the first opposite party was reluctant to issue the policy or the chit amount.  Hence the complainant filed a petition before the first opposite party on 14/06/13 to close the chit and for getting back the policy certificate.  But the opposite party was not turned up.  Hence the complainant along with his wife went to Pune, and stayed there two weeks for obtaining the LIC policy and thereby caused heavy financial loss and mental and physical stress.  While so in the year 2016 the complainant got a notice from the second opposite party, stating that they are initiating recovery steps against the complainant by attaching his landed properties for clearing the chit  dues with the first opposite party.  Only at that time the complainant came to know that the first opposite party had not closed the chit till now.  The complainant submitted detailed reply to this notice to the second opposite party.  But he received another notice on 29/07/16 from the second opposite party  demanding an amount of Rs.24,316/- with 12% interest from 25/01/14, failing which they will attached the landed property owned by him.  The complainant further stated that, the opposite parties have no authority to issue such a notice against him, since the complainant have not received a singe rupees from the first opposite party. Even though the chit was prized to him that not received the chit amount and hence no question of any instalment dues arises.  At the same time the first opposite party failed to extent their service in favour of the complainant, even after he submitted all the records for getting the chit amount thereby they caused much hardships to the complainant, and they are bound to compensate him adequately.  The complainant further contended that, the act of the first opposite party  are gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and against it, he approached this Forum and filed this complaint for allowing the relief such as to direct the opposite parties to withdraw from initiating any recovery steps against the complainant as per the notice issued by the second opposite party, and allow the litigation cost and compensation. 

 

                                                                                                                    (Cont........3)

-3-

       On notice opposite parties entered appearance and filed detailed reply version.  In their version opposite parties 1 and 2 contended that the first opposite party  forwarded to LIC certificate of the complainant's wife for assigning it in favour of the first opposite party.  But it was not returned from there, and the opposite parties 1 and 2 were not aware that whether the complainant went  to Pune and stayed there for 2 weeks and what expenses is caused to him.  Opposite parties further contended that from the complaint itself shows that the complainant received the LIC Policy  mature amount of Rs.2 Lakhs, and further placed averment that he was continued his effort to getting back the policy certificate is total false and misleading.

 

        Opposite parties 1 and 2 further contended that the complainant attended in the chit bid conducted on 29/07/2016 and the chit was prized in his favour for an amount of Rs.70, 000/-.  But the complainant not received the prized chit amount, and the complainant signed the bid register of the first opposite party on the same day itself.  As per section 16(A) of the chit agreement with the complainant  and the KSFE, the complainant is bound to remit the further chit instalment regularly otherwise the KSFE is having the authority to deduct the instalments from the prize money which was deposited in their account, and the chit company is at liberty to initiate further steps against the subscriber for realizing the balance chit amounts.   Opposite parties further contended that, as per the chit agreement complainant had to remit the whole chit instalments.  But he failed to do so.  As per the chit agreement complainant was bound to remit an amount of Rs.97,792/- to the first opposite party in total as per the bid, he ought to remit an actual amount of Rs. 69,557/- by deducting an amount of Rs.418 as tax and Rs.25/- as notice charges from prize amount of Rs.70,000/-.  By adding Rs.4000/-, being the first instalment remitted by the complainant the total amount in his account was Rs.73,557/-.  By deducting the amount from the total due amount of Rs.97,792/-, the balance amount to be remitted by the complainant in this account is Rs. 24,225/- plus interest. Further contended that it is admitted that the complainant remitted only one instalment,  but as per the chit rules, the first opposite party is bound to distribute the balance chit amount after each bid to the other subscribers as veetha palisha.  As per the rule, the first opposite party is deducted each instalment from the prized chit amount of the complainant till 17th instalment.  After this there was no amount in his account and hence  after  the  maturity  of  the  chit,  the  first  opposite  party   issued

                                                                                                                      (Cont........4)

-4-

demand notice on 02/06/15 and on 04/06/15 to the complainant and these notices were accepted by the complainant on 04/6/15 and 12/06/15 respectively.  Thereafter the first opposite party  initiated Revenue recovery proceeding against him through opposite party  3 to 5.  The fact being so, there is no deficiency in service from the part of the opposite parties as alleged in the complaint.

 

    In their written version the third opposite party contended that  complainant is a defaulter as defined the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.  AS per the requisition of the opposite parties, the District Collector, Idukki, issued RR Certificate No.B 05/42635/6/ K dated 30/09/15 authorising the third opposite party to realise the arrears along with interest, by proceeding against the complainant as prescribed under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.

 

The entire proceedings initiated by the third opposite parties  are bonafide official action initiated in lawful exercise of the powers vested under the KRR Act  and the impugned RR proceedings are absolutely in order.  If the complainant has any grievance, he has to work out the statuary remedies prescribed under this Act. 

 

The evidence adduced by the complainant by way of proof affidavit and documents.  He was examined as PW1 and Ext.P1 to Ext.P3 were marked.  Ext.P1 is the chit pass book, Ext.P2 is the RR notice dated 26/07/16, Ext.P3 is the copy of a petition submitted by the complainant to the third opposite party.  From the defence side the present manager of the first opposite party was examined as DW1 and Ext.R1 to Ext.R4 were marked.  Ext.R1 is the true copy of chit agreement, Ext.R2 is the copy of demand notice dated 02/06/15, Ext.R2(a) is the AD card, Ext.R3 is the copy of demand notice dated 09/06/15, Ext.R3(a) is the copy of AD card, Ext.R4 is the authorisation letter dated 03/06/17.  Later on the act the first opposite party produced attested copy of despatch register of KSFE and it is marked as Ext.R5.

 

Heard both sides,

 

        The point that arose for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

                                                                                                                       (Cont........5)

-5-

The Point:- We have gone through the evidence on record and heard the counsels in detail and came to a conclusion that, it is an admitted fact that the complainant entered into a chit agreement with the first opposite party and remitted Rs.4000/-  as the first instalment in the chit  having sala of One Lakh rupees and duration is 25 months.  In the first bid itself the chit was  prized in favour of him for an amount of Rs.70,000/-.  Even though the complainant submitted sufficient security by way of LIC documents the first opposite party is failed to granted the prized chit amount and thereby he sustained heavy financial loss as well as a mental agony.  The reason was pointed out by the first opposite party is non sanctioning of the chit amount was that the LIC policy which was forwarded to the LIC office Pune for assigning it in their favour was not returned.   Hence without getting confirmation and assignment from the concerned authority, the first opposite party was not in a position to accept the policy certificate as a security.  It is an admitted fact that the complainant remitted only one instalment and he had not get a single rupees from the first opposite party and at the same time the first opposite party demanded a huge amount by way of chit dues.

 

          Normally it is surprising that the act of the first opposite party is quite in human and illogical.  The complainant had suffered punishment in two ways.  Even though he lost 4000/- rupees and again he is under the threat of revenue recovery for an amount of nearly Rs.25000/-.  At the same time we have to go through the documents produced by the first opposite party.  As per clause 16(A) of Ext.R1 chit agreement,  complainant is the bidder and he prized the chit in the first bid itself.  Since he failed to provide sufficient security, the prized amount is deposited in the account and further instalments were deducted from the prized amount, and it was sufficient only to meet the 17th instalment.  As per the chit agreement complainant is bound to pay total amount of Rs.97,792/-.  Hence the first opposite party initiated RR proceedings against the complainant for the balance amount.  This document is not challenged by the complainant.  More over as per Ext.R2, R(a), R3, R3(a) we can see that prior to the initiation of RR proceedings, the first opposite party issued 2 demand notices and both these notices were accepted by the complainant as per Ext.R2(a) and Ext.R3(a) AD cards.  This shows that till the receipt of Ext.P2  Revenue Recovery notice he kept mum or he was sleeping over the two notices.  Even though the act of the first opposite party is a gross deficiency    in   their   service   the   complainant   was   failed  to  act  in   time.  

                                                                                                                     (Cont........6)

-6-

He submitted a petition before the RR Tahsildar, but as per the rules they are not liable to consider it.

 

       As per these documents and pleadings in the complaint ,it is seen that the  complainant is approached before this Forum for cancelling the Ext.P2 RR notice or restrain the opposite parties 3 to 5 from initiating RR proceedings and other consequent relief and the first prayer of the complainant is to direct the opposite parties 3 to 4 to cancel the  RR proceeding initiated against the complainant as per Ext.P2, RR notice issued U/s 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.  At this juncture it is pertinent to note that as per section 72 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act Civil Court are barred to entertain such matter. 

 

          The section 72 of the RR Act says, No Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to decide or deal with any question or to determine any matter which is by or under this Act required to be settled decide or deal with or to be delivered by the Government or the Commission of Land Revenue or any officer or authority under this Act.

 

Under on the basis of above discussion, the Forum is of a considered view that as per section 72 of the RR Act, Forum specifically barred from entertain proceedings under Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.  Hence complaint dismissed.

 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 27th  day of April, 2018.

 

                                                                                                        Sd/-

                                                                                        SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR (PRESIDENT)

                                                                                                                Sd/-

                                                                                          SRI. BENNY. K.  (MEMBER) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                      (Cont........7)

 

-7-

 

APPENDIX

 

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1               -Baburaj S.

On the side of the Opposite Party :

DW1              - Anilkumar

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1            -  The chit pass book

Ext.P2            -  The RR notice dated 26/07/16

Ext.P3          -  The copy of a petition submitted by the complainant to the

                         third opposite party.  

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Ext.R1     - The true copy of chit agreement

Ext.R2     - The copy of demand notice dated 02/06/15

Ext.R2(a) - The AD card

Ext.R3      - The copy of demand notice dated 09/06/15

Ext.R3(a) - The copy of AD card

Ext.R4      - The authorisation letter dated 03/06/17

 

 

                    Forwarded by Order,

 

 

                           SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT