Kerala

Idukki

CC/175/2021

Rakhi Prakash - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Kannur Arban Nidhi Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

12 Dec 2022

ORDER

DATE OF FILING : 07/12/2021

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, IDUKKI

Dated this the 12^th day of December 2022

Present :

              SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR                                               PRESIDENT

              SMT.ASAMOL P.                                                          MEMBER

              SRI.AMPADY K.S.                                                        MEMBER

CC NO.175/2021

Between

Complainants                                  :1 .  Rakhi Prakash,

                                                               Karthik House, Denducombu, Michelgiri,

                                                                Marayoor – 685 620, Devikulam Taluk,                                    

                                                                Idukki District. 

                                                          2 . Prakash, S/o Prabhakaran,

                                                                Karthik House, Denducombu, Michelgiri,

                                                                Marayoor – 685 620, Devikulam Taluk,            

                                                                 Idukki District. 

                                                                 (Both by Adv.Shiji Joseph)

                                                                 And

Opposite Party                             : 1 . The Kannur Urban Nidhi Ltd.,

                                                            Adarsh Arcade L1/1352 Opposite Railway    

                                                            Muthappan Temple, Thavakkar Road, Kannur,          

                                                             Represented by its General Manager.

                                                        2.  Any Time Money Pvt Ltd., Adarsh Arcade  

                                                             L1/1352 Opposite Railway Muthappan Temple,

                                                             Thavakkar Road, Kannur,

                                                             Represented by its General Manager.

                                                        3 . Ajesh Amayath, Adarsh Arcade L1/1352 1352  

                                                             Opposite Railway Muthappan Temple,  

                                                             Thavakkar Road, Kannur,

                                                              Represented by its General Manager.

                                                         4 . Showkath Ali, Adarsh Arcade L1/1352 1352  

                                                              Opposite Railway Muthappan Temple,

                                                              Thavakkar Road, Kannur,

                                                               Represented by its General Manager.

                                                         5 . Mr.Antony Sonny,  Adarsh Arcade L1/1352

                                                              1352 Opposite Railway Muthappan Temple,

                                                               Thavakkar Road, Kannur,

                                                               Represented by its General Manager.

                                                               (All of them by Adv.Vidyaprakash)

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

-2-

 

 

O R D E R

SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER

 

Complainant’s case is briefly discussed hereunder:-

 

1 . Complainants are husband and wife.  They are running a mobile shop in the name and style Mobile world Marayoor as a self employment.  They have no other business and the income from the business is the sole source of lively hood of the complainants.

2 . First opposite party is the Kannur Urban Nidhi Ltd., a financial enterprises recognized by the Government of Kerala having license No.CIN 465999KL20 20PLN 062050 having its registered office at Kannur.  The Managing Director of the company is competent to represent the first opposite party.  Second opposite party is a subsidiary company under the first opposite party represented by its Managing Director.  Third opposite party is the present Managing Director of first opposite party.  Since the second opposite party’s assurance, the complainants have invested the money.  Hence second opposite party is arrayed as in their personal capacity and official capacity too.  Third and fourth opposite parties are the principal officers of the first opposite party.

3 . First opposite party’s agent approached complainants offering a financial service business including a mini ATM facility attachable to the present mobile shop at Marayoor.  For that, opposite parties  asked complainants to purchase an equipments like a swiping machine of ATM cards, for Rs.25,960/-.  Believing the assurance of the opposite parties, on 08/04/2021 the complainant’s have purchased the machine by paying Rs.25,960/-.

 

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

 

-3-

 

4 . Opposite party assured at the time of purchasing the machine, using the ATM machine, can be used as a MICRO ATM, fund transfer, UPI payments etc.  However after purchasing on 08/04/2021, none of the services were not available, in that machine and as the services were not commenced by the opposite parties.

5 . At the time of purchasing the machine, it was assured by the opposite parties that, if the complainant is not satisfied with the working of the machine, the amount paid by the complainant as deposit can be refund by surrendering the machine and its bill.

6 . Since the machine was not working properly and the services offered by the opposite parties are not commenced even many months after the purchase of the machine, the complainant asked  first opposite party to pay back the money.  Then, opposite parties asked complainant’s to send the machine, complainant send the machine and the original bill.  On 25/08/2021 and first opposite party received the consignment.  After receiving the consignment, first opposite party paid only Rs.15000/- and an amount of Rs.10969/- to be paid.  In spite of repeated demands of the complainants, the opposite party did not pay the money.  Recently it is found that the phone numbers of the opposite parties 3 to 5 are switched off.

7 . The non-payment of money after getting back the machine and the failure to provide the services offered by the opposite parties are gross deficiency in service resulted in loss of money to the complainants.  Hence the complainants are entitled for a compensation of Rs.10000/-.  Hence, complainant has prayed the following reliefs.

1. The opposite parties may be asked to pay Rs.10000/- with 12% interest from the date of return of the ATM Machine till the date of payment.                                                                                                                                       

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

 

-4-

 

2. The opposite parties may be asked to pay Rs.10000/- as compensation for the pain and suffering of the complainants.
3. Rs.3000/- may be allowed as cost of the complaint.
4. Such other reliefs that deemed just and equitable also may be granted.

Upon notice, opposite parties has entered appearance.  Opposite parties number 1, 2 and 3 have filed written version.  Others have not filed written version.  Contentions of opposite parties 1 and 3 are as follows.

1 . This complaint filed by the complainants 1 and 2 is false, frivolous, vexatious and not maintainable on law and on both facts and circumstances of the case and is devoid of any truth and on merits.

2 . The complaint  filed by the above complainants are not at all maintainable either on the true facts of the case or before law and is liable to be dismissed.  It is to be noted that the complainants have with an ulterior motive in order to gain illegally have suppressed many true materials and facts from this Hon’ble Forum.

3 . The  Kannur Urban Nidhi Ltd., is a public limited company duly incorporated under the Companies Act 2013, having it’s Registered Office at Aadarsh Arcade L1/1352 Ground Floor, Opposite  Railway Muthappan Temple, Thavakkara Road, Kannur 673 001.  It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Forum that as to why the complainants have impleaded the opposite party No.3 as a party to the complaint when he is only a staff of the opposite party No.1.  Further the complaint as against the opposite party No.1 and the opposite party No.3 is on the whole a gross abuse as they do not have any role on any of the transactions as alleged by the complainants together in the complaint.

 

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

 

-5-

4 . The averments made by the complainant before this Hon’ble Forum in their complaint with regards to the version that,  “The first opposite party is Kannur Urban Nidhi Ltd., a financial enterprises recognized by Ministry of Corporate Affairs having License No.CIN 465999KL20 20PLN 062050 having Registered Office at Kannur” is totally denied by the answering opposite party No.1.  The answering opposite party brings to the kind notice of this Hon’ble Forum that the complainants have together generated a sham and shallow complaint  so as to make illegal gains without producing any valid evidence before this Hon’ble Forum to prove the CIN number as averred by them before this Hon’ble Forum.  The answering opposite party’s CIN No.is U65999KL2020PLN062050.

5 . The allegation made by the complainants in paragraph No.3 that, “The first opposite party’s agent approached the complainants offering a financial service business including a MINI ATM facility attachable to the present Mobile Shop at Marayoor”.  The answering opposite party does not have any executive working as alleged by the complainants who had approached them for the alleged Act.   The nature of business entertained by the answering opposite party is Purely Nidhi Company and as everyone is aware business can be done only within the members of the said Nidhi Company and they are no way connected to any of the transactions as alleged by the complainants in paragraph No.3 of the complaint.

6  The averments made by the complainants in paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 of the complaint is not related to this answering opposite party and further the allegations in continuance made by the complainant’s in paragraph No.6, “On 25/08/2021 and the first opposite party received the consignment.  After receiving the consignment the first opposite party paid only Rs.15000/-“  are all false and has been an allegation made by the complainants so as to develop a weightage on their allegations made against the opposite party No.1 before this Hon’bel Forum.  The answering opposite party had neither

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

-6-

communicated with the complainants vide any mode nor had they requested the complainants to return the machine to them nor had they received any consignment as its not their nature of business.  The complainants have framed a false picture to make illegal gains for no deal ever entertained between the complainants and the answering opposite party.  The answering opposite party vide the sham and shallow allegations made by the complainants without any valid proof and evidences have been put into defamation vide the false complaint preferred by the complainants as again them. It is humbly submitted that the answering opposite party is company engaged in Nidhi business and they have gained good will, name and fame and reputation in their business.  The answering opposite party further states that their name and fame has been spoiled because of the imputations freely deployed by the complainant through this complaint.  It has been made with malafide intention to injure the image of the opposite party.

7 . Further it is also denied that no cause of action ever arose against the answering opposite party herein to claim any compensation, damages.  This complaint is nothing but an abuse of the due process of law, and as such the same is liable to be dismissed as against the answering opposite party.  Further the prayer clause is also denied by the answering  opposite party as wrong and incorrect.  It is vehemently denied that the complainants are entitled to any of the prayer as prayed for in the prayer clause.  It is also reiterated that the complainants have not put forward the true and clear facts of the above case before this Hon’ble Forum and had mislead this Hon’ble Forum with distorted and incomplete fact and therefore the present complaint is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost.

Contentions of second opposite party are discussed hereunder.

1 . The present consumer complaint filed by the complainants 1 and 2 is false, frivolous, vexatious and not maintainable on law and on both facts and

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

 

-7-

 

circumstances of the above case and is devoid of any truth and on merits.

2 . It is to be noted that the complainants 1 and 2 have together with an ulterior motive in order to gain illegally from this answering opposite party No.2 have suppressed many true materials and facts from this Hon’ble Forum.

3 . The answering opposite party No.2 M/s AnyTimeMoney Pvt. Ltd., is a private limited company duly incorporated under the Companies Act, having it’s Registered Office at Aadarsh Arcade L1/1352, opposite Railway Muthappan Temple, Thavakkara Road, Kannur 673 001.  The opposite party No.2 herein is a Fintech Company duly represented by its Authorized Representative/General Manager and she is duly authorized to appear on behalf of the opposite party No.2.

4 . The averments made by the complainants before this Hon’ble Forum in their complaint with regard to the version in paragraph No.2 of the complaint that, “The first opposite party is the Kannur Urban Nidhi Ltd., a financial enterprises recognized by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs having License No.CIN 465999KL20 20PLN 062050 having office at Kannur.  The Managing Director of the company is competent to represent the first opposite party” and “The second opposite party is a subsidiary company under the first opposite party represented by its Managing Director” are totally denied by the answering opposite party No.2.  A prime company shall have a Managing  Director wherein a subsidiary company under the primary company shall again does not have any person to represent it under the same title of a Managing Director and this itself shall bring to this Hon’ble Forum’s kind visualization that the first opposite party and this answering second opposite party are not one or having relationship of a primary company and a subsidiary company and both are having a separate entity.

                                                                                                                    (Cont.........8)

 

-8-

 

The second opposite party state that the complainants together have generated a sham and shallow complaint without producing any valid evidence before this Hon’ble Forum.

5 . The allegation made by the complainants 1 and 2 in paragraph No.3 that,  “The second opposite party’s agent approached the complainants offering a financial service business including MICROATM facility with the diginext banking device for Mobile Shop at Marayoor” is specifically admitted by the complainants before this Hon’ble Forum.  The answering opposite party submits before this Hon’ble Forum that the complainants did not opt for a device with MICROATM facility and they have chosen only ordinary device with other facilities which is clearly evident from the documentary evidence No.3 application form which was filled and signed by the complainants and produced before this Hon’ble Forum.

6 . The true fact is that immediately after the machine was purchased by the complainants 1 and 2, they had been utilizing the machine for more than four months and they have also earned so much having reaped earning and benefits out of the said machine by utilizing services like fund transfer, UPI payments etc.

7 .  Further complainants 1 and 2 are knowing very well that both the first and second opposite party  are companies with different entities, had the complainants 1 and 2 with a wicked intent to make the opposite parties to prove their genuinity have  preferred this complaint without any basis.  Further the averment made by the complainants 1 and 2 in paragraph No.5 of the complaint should have been done if at all the complainants 1 and 2’s version that the machinery had faced problem immediately on its purchase by them.  The claim of any refund on the machineries deficiency could have raised only on facing any trouble on the immediate instance on the purchase

                                                                                                                    (Cont..........9)

 

-9-

of the machinery.  The answering opposite party humbly submits that no where it has given or assured the complainants about refund of the money by surrendering the machine and bill.

8 . The opposite party No.2’s honesty and fairness has been questioned by the complainants 1 and 2 without any basis and with malafide intention and had thrown mud on them without any fault of theirs.  The answering opposite party No.2 clearly refutes the allegation about the refund of the money as it has not been mentioned anywhere in the application form filled and signed by the complainants.

9 . The complainants 1 and 2 herein by putting distorted and incorrect version of the facts of the above case had wasted this Hon’ble Forum’s valuable and precious time and further have tried to mislead the above Hon’ble Forum.  Hence this complaint should be dismissed with exemplary costs.

Complainant has produced 3 documents.  These were marked as Ext.P1 to Ext.P3.  No oral evidence adduced by complainant since the date of posting of evidence, opposite parties was absent and not represented by counsel or agent.  We have heard the counsel for complainant.  Thereafter, it was taken for orders.  Now the points which arise for consideration are

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2. If so, what are the reliefs entitled to complainant?

The Points are considered together.

We have perused the complaint and marked documents.  Also, we have gone through the written version of opposite parties.  After perusing the documents and complaint, we have found that second opposite party is only the concerned party in this complaint and other opposite parties have no connection with the allegation of complainant.  There is no evidence adduced                                                                                                                   

                                                                                                                (Cont..........10)

-10-

 

to show that 1^st, 3^rd, 4^th and 5^th opposite parties have any connection with complainant in any way.  Under Ext.P3, it is seen that first complainant has filled and signed the application form.  As per this application form, we find first complainant is agreed to have an acquiring relationship with second opposite party.  But this is not signed by second opposite party.  However, second opposite party has stated in his written version that complainants did not opt for a device with ‘MICRO ATM’ facility and they chosen only ordinary device with other facilities which is clearly evident from the documentary evidence No.3 ie, application form.  It means that complainant and second opposite party are agreed as per Ext.P3.  It is proved under Ext.P1 that second opposite party has received Rs.25,960/- from complainant on 08/04/2021.  Complainant alleged that after purchasing the machine, none of the service were available, therefore he sent the machine and original bill through courier, first opposite party has received the consignment and paid only Rs.15,000/- for complainant.  But he didn’t pay the balance money.  We have found that first opposite party has no connection with complainant.  It is evident that second opposite party has received the amount of Rs.25,960/- from complainant.  Also it is seen that consignment was sent by complainant through courier to second opposite party under Ext.P2, it was proved.  Complainant claims that he received Rs.15,000/- only and balance amount to be paid by opposite parties.  Even though second opposite party has filed written version, no evidence adduced from the part of him.  Other opposite parties also have not tendered any evidence against the allegation.  We are of the view that complainant is entitled to get the balance amount from second opposite party who was received the alleged amount as per Ext.P1.  It is not seen that second opposite party has refunded the amount which he was received from complainant.  Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on the part of second opposite party.

                                                                                                                     

 

                                                                                                          (Cont..........11)

 

-11-

 

In the result, complaint is allowed as hereunder.

1.  Second opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- with 12% interest from the date of return of the ATM machine till the date of order to complainant.
2. Second opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.3000/- as cost of litigation to complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of order, failing which the amount except cost of litigation shall carry 12% interest from the date of order till its realization.

Extra copies to be taken back by parties without delay.

 

Pronounced by this Commission on this the 12^th day of December, 2022.

 

                                                                                        Sd/-

                                                                               SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER                                                                   

                                                                                           Sd/-                                                     

                                                                        SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT

                                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                              SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                   (Cont.........12)

-12-

 

                                                                                                                                                                           

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

Nil

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1- Copy of Cash Receipt dated 08/04/2021

Ext.P2 - Copy of Courier consignment note dated 25/08/2021

Ext.P3 – Application Form.

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil              

 

 

                                                                                                 Forwarded by Order  

 

 

                                                                                          ASSISTANT REGISTRAR