RANBIR SINGH Vs. T R DAVID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition arises from the order dated 23.11.2002 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Andhra Pradesh, in Appeal No. 576/2001. The facts in brief are : 1. The complainant was the subscriber of the chit floated by the opposite party, for Rs. 1 lakh payable in 50 instalments of Rs. 2,000/- each. On the auction held on 22.11.1998 he became the highest bidder for a sum of Rs. 79,920/- and he was paid only Rs. 49,760/- out of the auctioned amount of Rs. 79,920/-. The balance amount of Rs. 30,000/- was not paid till the 43rd instalment was made. As there was no response from the opposite party with regard to the payment of Rs. 30,000/-, he stopped paying the remaining seven instalments and went to the District Forum seeking a direction to the opposite party to make the remaining payment of Rs. 30,000/- . The opposite party contested the claim before the District Forum by filing his reply. The contention of the opposite party was that after book adjustment amounting to Rs. 31,160/- as agreed by the complainant in writing, the balance of Rs. 49,760/- was paid under two cheques. The opposite party also contended before the District Forum that as there was default on the part of the complainant, a civil suit was filed for recovery of Rs. 13,232/- pending on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad as he did not come to the office to settle the amount. The District Forum, on the basis of the record produced before it, directed the opposite party No. 1 to pay Rs. 31,240/- to the complainant with interest at 18% p.a. from 24.3.1999 till the date of payment, after deducting the amounts due under seven instalments from May, 1999 till November, 1999 by giving full dividends together with a sum of Rs. 1,000/- by way of costs. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the opposite parties went in appeal to the State Commission. The State Commission in its well-reasoned order came to the conclusion that the opposite parties did not indicate to the complainant what was the nature of the book adjustments, as to how and why and in whose accounts this amount was credited, and hence, the complainant vide his letter dated 17.9.1999 informed the opposite parties that "he does not understand what they meant by 'as desired by you' and book adjustments" and requested the particulars. The State Commission went further and held that, "even in the legal notice dated 25.9.1999 which was issued long after, no details about adjustment of these accounts or account numbers or name of the account holders are furnished. It is clear from the order of the State Commission that one of the account holders is the wife of the Managing Director of the Chits. While dismissing the appeal, the State Commission held as under :

(2.) NOW the complainant has come in revision before us. We have seen the orders of the State Commission and the District Forum. We have also seen the various annexures placed in the file. We have also seen the form enabling the petitioners to deduct the subscription amount from the bid payable amount of Rs. 79,920/-. On seeing this form, we cannot but come to the same conclusion as had been reached by the Fora below. We find no reason to interfere with the order of the State Commission and dismiss the same. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Revision Petition dismissed.