Taking W.P.No.10456 of 2005 as the illustrative one, the brief fact of the matter is as follows. The first respondent (hereafter, the complainant) joined chit fund run by respondent Nos.2 and 3. The chit value is Rs.1,00,000/-. The complainant paid the instalments regularly. After completion of the chit period, the amount of Rs.94,000/- due was not paid. Respondent No.2 registered the byelaws with the Registrar of Chits, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad (petitioner herein). Being unsuccessful to get the chit amount, the complainant filed C.D.No.192 of 2003 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum – II, Hyderabad. The same was opposed by all the opposite parties including the petitioner herein. On considering the merits of the case, by an order dated 21.11.2003, the District Forum directed the Chit Fund Company to pay the chit amount with interest at 12% per annum to the complainant, failing which the Registrar of Chits was directed to make payment of FDR value of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant. Thereafter, the petitioner herein filed F.A.No.118 of 2005 before the State Commission. Inter alia, it was contended that the registration of the chit with the Registrar of Chits is a mandatory requirement; the Registrar performs the statutory functions under the Andhra Pradesh Chit Funds Act, 1971 (since repealed by the Chit Funds Act, 1982 (Central Act No.40 of 1982)), and that the deficiency of service cannot be attributed to the Registrar. These contentions did not find favour, and the State Commission dismissed the FA, aggrieved by which, the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is invoked. Be it noted, in all other three cases the factual background is same, and the petitioner was directed to pay the FDR value to the complainant before the District Forum.
