VIVEKANANDAN CHETTIAR vs R.MOHANDASS

BOTH these appeals by the same opposite party have been heard together and are disposed of by this common order.

THE case of the complainants was as follows : THEy paid each Rs. 19,000/- to the opposite party who promised them to render the service of getting employment at Malaysia. Alongwith the money the complainants have also handed over their passport, but no employment was procured. THE opposite party refused even to return the money given by the complainants. On the basis of these allegations, the complainants have approached the District Forum with the following prayers : (a) for return of the money paid Rs. 19,000/- with 18% interest; (b) for damages for physical and mental suffering Rs. 15,000/-; (c) for costs and expenses at Rs. 5,000/-; (d) towards compensation at Rs. 10.000/-; and (e) to direct return of passport.

The opposite party denied the receipt of the money and claimed that he was also one of the persons like the complainants who was defrauded by the Krishnaraj.

THE Trial Court after hearing the parties and perusing the documents found that the opposite party has given a receipt in perfect form on stamped paper to the effect that he has received an amount of Rs. 19.000/- from each complainant for the purpose of securing employment. The opposite party attempted to counter the fact of the receipt of the amount in alleging that the signature found in the documents produced by the complainants was not his. He took a plea that he used to sign only in English. But the District Forum found that his counter was signed in Tamil as are the receipts. Secondly the District Forum found also that there was another uncontroverted document in this case which is the copy of a letter written by the opposite party to his own brother-in-law in which the names of the complainants are mentioned as persons who are willing to go to Malasiya and in that letter the opposite party prays his brother in-law to send him necessary tickets for them at the earliest. This uncontroverted document proves conclusively that the opposite party has taken steps towards the travel of the complainants to Malasiya. He would not have taken such steps without payment by the complainants. So this document gives a lie direct to the defence put up by the opposite party. Therefore, the plea taken by the opposite party that the receipts filed by the complainants were not signed by him is totally false.

THE opposite party would contend that he alongwith the complainants was defrauded by one Krishnaraj, but he has failed to give any particulars about that person, his transaction with him and the steps he has taken in respect of the alleged deceit. From the uncontroverted document we have referred to ''above we can safely conclude that the opposite party was busily engaged through his brother-in-law in sending persons to Malasiya. It is true that among the persons listed there his name also appears. But in the body of the letter it is specified as follows : "If you are willing to call me over there, kindly take a ticket on behalf of my name and send the same at the earliest."

This shows that his case is different from the other persons listed. He was one of the person active in promoting the employment of the local persons and only in case his presence was necessary he volunteered to go to Malasiya. THErefore, there is no single doubt about the fact that the opposite party has offered to procure employment to the complainants and that has received the money. THE orders of the District Forum do not suffer from any defect. THEy are entirely confirmed. In me result, the appeals are dismissed with cost of Rs. 500/- in each case. Appeal dismissed with costs. ______________