TALLURI ANANDA KUMAR Vs. D.PALLAVI
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Talluri Ananda Kumar
Click here to view full judgement.
P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU,PRESIDENT -
(1.) THE opposite party
before the District Forum is the appellant. The case of the complainants
is that the appellant who is common in all the appeals started real
estate business under the name and style of œSri Pardha Real Estates
and floated a scheme under which each member had to contribute Rs. 350/ -
p.m. for 66 months and he also announced incentives and prizes and the
lucky winners in the draws could get plots early while others would be
given plots at the end of the scheme. The complainants paid between 39
and 52 instalments. They came to know that it was a bogus scheme and the
appellant had no land as he had no title to any land to allot to the
subscribers. Hence they filed the complaints.
(2.) THE District Forum found that it was a bogus scheme and the appellant in order to escape liability played unfair trade practice by
collecting huge amounts. In similiar matters when directions were given
for payment of the amounts collected by him, he approached the State
Commission wherein the appeals were dismissed upholding the order of the
(3.) HOWEVER , the learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is not one of the partners and he has nothing to do with the
partnership that did the business. In order to show that the appellant is
not a partner the learned Counsel filed a copy of the partnership deed.
The District Forum found that the appellant was responsible for starting the scheme and collecting the deposits from the subscribers
under a bogus scheme. In order to escape the liability he played unfair
methods and collected the amounts and so he is responsible to pay back
the amounts collected on behalf of Sri Pardha Real Estates. It also
referred to FA Nos. 562/1998 to 567/1998 wherein this Commission while
dismissing the appeals held that Mr. T. Anand Kumar must have collected
the deposits from the subscribes in the name of Sri Pardha Real Estates.
Thus the District Forum concluded that the appellant is alone liable to
refund the amount.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.