KONAKANCHI MADHU Vs. CHAIRMAN, SHRIRAM GROUP COMPANIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Typed to dictation.

(2.) The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant joined opp.party chit on 29.7.2003 and paid a sum of Rs.1,88,015/- towards non prized chit of Rs.5 lakhs of 50 months at Rs.10,000/- each month. He paid the last subscription on 27.4.06 for Rs.1 lakh including a penalty of Rs.20,000/-. On 20.7.2006 opp.parties 1 to 4 removed his membership without giving prior notice as per Section 20 (1) (2) of A.P. Chit Fund Act,1971. This removal was not even intimated to the Registrar of Chits under Section 20 (3) (4) of A.P.Chit Fund Act,1971. .

(3.) The complainant submits that the opposite parties did not adhere to Sub Section 1 of Section 20 and Section 21 of A.P.Chit Fund Act,1971. He also submitted in his complaint that Sub Section 2 and Sub Section 3 of Section 21 read together with Sections 2, 22 and Section 13 of A.P.Chit Fund Act 1971 clearly specifies that the complainant should have been given an opportunity before removal and that the removal to be informed to the Registrar of Chits and that any substitution made in the place of defaulting subscriber to be entered in the relevant book and filed with the Registrar of Chits within 14 days from the date of substitution. It is the complainant's case that a notice was sent to him on 10.5.2006 which he rejected since the notice ought to have been sent on 20th or 21st of May and infact he took notice on 27.4.06 and paid Rs.1 lakh and he also paid Rs.20,000/- towards penal interest. The complainant submits that he received a legal notice from Sriram Chits Pvt. Ltd. in August, 2006 as he stood as guarantor for chit no. KDTN 2/34 , his wife's chit as it was due around Rs.20,000/-. The complainant approached opposite party on 5.9.2006 and cleared his dues and he was told that his membership was removed. So the very next day he informed the opposite party to adjust the future liability with advance payments from KDLC 5/25. The complainant submits that he stood as a guarantor for one M.Bhaskar, Ch.Pavan Kumar Sharma, S.Gayatri Prasad, P.Vijayalakshmi and T.Srinivasa Rao who are not defaulters and they were not charged any notice regarding the default but opp.parties 1 to 4 adjusted the entire amount towards their prized chits. The complainant submits that after pursuing, he was informed that the adjustment was based on his previous requisition letter given on 6.9.2006 which he submits was forged by opp.parties 1 to 4 and also that any such adjustment was contrary to Section 22 of A.P.C.F.Act,1971. The complainant gave a notice on 12.12.06 for which the opposite parties replied on 27.12.2006 stating that removal intimation advise was filed with the Registrar of Chits on 26.7.06. The complainant approached the Registrar of Chits on 18.1.2007 but was informed that no such removal intimation belonging to Ticket no.25 was mentioned.