GANGADHARAN Vs. MOHANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is directed against the judgment in A. S. 66 of 1996 rendered by the Subordinate Judge, Cherthala, confirming the judgment of the Munsiff's Court, dismissing O. S. 436/1992 - a suit for return of non priced subscription paid under a chit.

(2.) THE petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit. THE allegation contained in the plaint is that he was a subscriber in two chitties which were conducted by the respondent/ defendant. One of the terms and conditions of the chitty was that if any subscriber who has not bid the chitty commits any default, the amount already remitted by him with 3% interest deducting the dividend will have to be given after six months from the date of termination of the chitty and if the foreman commits default and the chitty could not be conducted due to his default, the amount due to the subscriber who has not bid the chitty js to be given within three months from the date of default with 5% interest. Because of the default of the defendant the chitty could not be conducted and according to the plaintiff, he is entitled to the amount he has already remitted with 12% interest from the defendant. Petitioner- plaintiff has paid up to and inclusive of 15th installments - the last payment being on 23. 4. 1986 on which day he paid Rs. 1,000/- and obtained a receipt. THErefore he prayed for a decree for the amount already paid by him with 12% interest including dividend and other benefits.

(3.) AS per the bye-law governing the terms and conditions of the chitty between the plaintiff and the defendant, if the subscriber who has not bid the chitty commits any default, the amount already remitted, by him is to be given with 3% interest after deducting the dividend, after the expiry of six months from the date of termination of the chitty. On the other hand, if the chitty could not be conducted due to the fault of the foreman, the subscriber is entitled to recover the amount after the expiry of three months including the dividend with 5% interest. According to the plaintiff, he could not remit the installments since the chitty had not been properly conducted by the foreman.