GOURU LINGAIAH Vs. N CHANDRASHEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant whose complaint was dismissed in CD. No.142 of 1991 preferred this appeal. His case was that he contributed for 3 Memberships in Anand Enterprise Money Circulation Scheme and paid towards those 3 Memberships a sum of Rs.10,840/-. But the opposite party in spite of his claim did not refund the amount. The opposite party took a plea that he is not the person, that is running Anand Enterprise Money Circulation Scheme but it was run by Tadakamalla Sharavan Kumar, a cousin of the opposite party. It is also their case that the complainant borrowed Rs.18,000/- from the opposite party, that is, Rs.6000/- each membership and paid only Rs.10,840/- and he has to pay the balance of the amount. The complainant was examined as PW1, no documents were marked on behalf of him. On a consideration of the evidence the District Forum held that the complainant did not produce any evidence to show that the opposite party is a proprietor or partner of Anand Enterprise Money Circulation Scheme. It further held even assuming that the appellant is proprietor or partner, the relationship between the parties is that of Creditor and Debtor and cannot be said there is "deficiency in service". It accordingly directed the parties to a Civil Court.

(2.) In this appeal it is submitted that the opposite party is due in a sum of Rs.10,840/- towards the chits. Since the respondent denied in any way associated with Anand Enterprises Money Circulation Scheme, the District Forum rightly came to the conclusion that no relief can be granted against the opposite party. It also further held in the absence of any evidence adduced by the petitioner to show the relationship of a creditor and debtor, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the District Forum. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.