NAILAMMAI ACHI Vs. SREE VISALAM CHIT FUNDS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is focussed as against the judgment and decree dated 17.06.1993 passed by the learned V Additions Judge, City Civil Court, Madras in dismissing the suit in O.S.No.10758 of 1988, which was filed by the plaintiffs as against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.29,000/- For convenience sake, the parties are referred to here under according to their litigative status before the trial Court.

(2.) BROADLY but briefly, narratively but precisely, the case of the plaintiffs as stood exposited from the plaint could be portrayed thus:One K.M K. Muthiah Chettiar, the husband of the first plaintiff and father of the second plaintiff Invested in the first defendant company large amounts by way of shares, in addition to having deposited a sum of Rs.36,400/- as Fixed Deposits in the same concern. Subsequently, he died, leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs whereupon the plaintiffs got renewed the fixed deposits after withdrawing a sum of Rs.7,400/-- from the aforesaid sum of Rs.36,400/- Those fixed deposits were for two years initially and renewed subsequently. Accordingly those fixed deposits were renewed up to 16.11.1980 interest was received up to 16.11.1980 by the plaintiffs subsequently, there was an oral agreement between the parties concerned, whereupon those fixed deposits were renewed up to August 1988. Subsequently, the plaintiffs came to know that the second defendant is the financier and the first defendant happens to be the power agent of the second defendant. The defendants were in the habit of paying higher interest also to the customers over and above 12% as agreed earlier to that effect, a letter was addressed by the plaintiffs on 24.03.1988 however, it evoked a reply to the effect that the defendants were not bound to pay interest after 16.11.1980. In fact, earlier the defendants orally agreed to renew the fixed deposits periodically for every two years. The fact also remains that the second plaintiff requested the defendants to keep the accrued interest also in the fixed deposits along with the principal amount. The plaintiffs could not produce the fixed deposit receipts as they were missing. Hence after executing the indemnity bond they received the principal amount only, which the defendants paid without interest. The plaintiffs received the principal reserving their right to claim interest. The defendants having utilised the amount deposited by the plaintiffs for such a long time are bound to pay interest to the tune of Rs.43,419.03 ps relating to the period between 16.11.1980 and May 1988. Hence the suit.

(3.) THE trial Court framed the relevant issues. During the trial, the second plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and Exs.1 to 37 were marked. On the defendants' side, their official DW1 was examined. Exs.B1 to B7 were marked during cross of PW1. THE trial Court ultimately dismissed the suit.