IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.62 OF 2000 BETWEEN M/s. Margadarsi Chit Fund Limited. …PETITIONER AND I. Saibaba and four others. …RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. P. Raja Rao Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. A.V. Sesha Sai Mr. CH. Dhanamjaya The Court made the following: - ORDER: This revision is directed against a decree passed in S.C.No.581 of 1997 by the Small Causes Court, Hyderabad wherein the suit filed by the petitioner herein for recovery of Rs.9,830/- was dismissed in view of the fact that during the pendency of the suit itself, the defendant has paid the entire amount of Rs.8,100/-. To the extent of the interest claimed by the plaintiff, the finding of the Court below is that the plaintiff is not entitled to any interest, as there was no demand of dividend and the defendant has paid his subscriptions regularly including all arrears. In view of that the interest was disallowed and in view of the payment of entire amount by the defendant, the suit was dismissed. 2. The Court below on analysis of evidence had recorded the findings as under: (a) That the monthly subscription has to be paid by the subscriber at the foremans office predominantly. But the provisions of Section 15(b) of the agreement as well as bye laws goes to show that the Recovery Officer can also collect monthly subscription from the subscriber through recovery staff. To show this practice Exs.B1 to B8 receipts are signed by the Recovery Officer which are in the name of D1’s wife. It is not the case of the plaintiff that D1’s wife used to come and pay the amounts at the foremans office. (b) As per Section 25 of the A.P. Chit Fund Act no notice was issued in writing so that the plaintiff is entitled to claim consolidated payment of future subscriptions from a defaulting prized subscriber. (c) It is not in dispute that D1 deposited an amount of Rs.8,100/- after filing the suit which includes all future monthly installments and the chit period is still subsisting, as it consists of 50 monthly installments commencing from 21.11.1995. The suit is filed on 14.08.1997. The defendant paid the entire amount by way of cash on 20.10.1997 and by 03.11.1997. The chit is going to be closed by August 1998. Thus the chit period still subsists and the defendant deposited entire future subscriptions also. When the defaulting subscriber pays the amount of default period and also future installment amount at a time and when the chit period is in subsistence as there is no provision to stop payment of dividend. In the instant case, the defendant is entitled for dividend for future installments, as the chit still subsisting after payment of Rs.8,100/- by the defendant. It is also to be noted that the defendant failed to discharge their contractual and statutory obligation in tendering the monthly subscription regularly. One cannot avoid payment on the pretext that the plaintiff did not send their collecting agent or Recovery Officer for collecting the amount. Therefore, it was noticed lapses on the part of the plaintiff as well the defendant herein. 3. While exercising the revisional jurisdiction of this Court, the said findings of the Court below, reached on the basis of appreciation of evidence, cannot be disturbed as they are based on evidence and cannot be said to be perverse. The civil revision petition, therefore, is without any merits and is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 11, 2009 DSK