Punjab

SAS Nagar Mohali

CC/168/2015

Bharat Bhushan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kudos Chemie Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

07 Jul 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAS NAGAR, MOHALI

                                  Consumer Complaint No.168 of 2015

                                 Date of institution:          13.04.2015

                                                     Date of Decision:            07.07.2015

 

Bharat Bhushan son of Mohinder Pal Sudan, resident of House No.156/15, Old Cotton Factory, Prem Nagar, Ambala City.

    ……..Complainant

                                        Versus

1.     Managing Director, Kudos Chemie Limited, Barwala Road, Derabassi, District SAS Nagar.

2.     M/s. Kudos Chemie Limited, Barwala Road, Derabassi, District SAS Nagar.

………. Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

CORAM

Mrs. Madhu. P. Singh, President.

Shri Amrinder Singh, Member

Mrs. R.K. Aulakh, Member.

 

Present:    Shri Tarun Malhotra, counsel for the complainant.

Opposite Parties ex-parte.

 

(Shri Amrinder Singh , Member)

 

ORDER

 

                The complainant filed the present complaint against the opposite parties ( for short ‘the OPs’) pleading that he joined with the OPs as Jr. Assistant Commercial on 06.12.2007 and resigned on 12.12.2013. At the time of resignation he was drawing salary of Rs.19,699/- per month.  At that time the OPs assured that he would be paid the gratuity amount within 2 days of acceptance of his resignation. As per the computerized statement showing details of full and final settlement of amount to be paid to the complainant an amount of Rs.63,876/- was shown payable to the complainant on account of gratuity. However, as per provisions of Gratuity Act, the complainant is entitled to gratuity of Rs.1,66,000/-.  The complainant requested the OPs number of times  and even served a legal notice dated 27.01.2015 but the OPs have not paid him the amount of gratuity to the tune of Rs.1,66,000/- and this act of the OPs is deficiency in service on their part for which complainant is liable to be compensated by the OPs.     Lastly the complainant has prayed to issue following direction to the Opposite Parties (for short ‘the OPs’) to:

(a)    pay him Rs.1,66,000/- on account of payment of gratuity with interest @ 18% per annum from due date.

(b)    pay him Rs.1,00,000/-  for mental agony and harassment.

(c)    pay him Rs.25,000/- as costs of litigation.

 

2.             After admission of the complaint, notice was sent to the OPs.  As per report of India Post, the notices were delivered upon the OPs on 18.05.2015 but none appeared for them and thus they were proceeded against exparte on 28.05.2015.

3.             To succeed in the complaint, the complainant proved on record affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 and tendered in evidence documents Ex.C-1 to C-5.

4.             We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and  gone through the contents of the complaint and written arguments filed by him.

5.             There are following two  main  issues involved in its complaint:-

                Q1. Whether the complainant is a consumer?

Q2.Whether this Consumer Forum has jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present matter?

6.              In order to find out answer to the first issue, the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court “Regional Provident Commissioner versus Shiv Kumar Joshi”, III (1999)CPJ 36(SC) is quite helpful in which it has held that  “Employees Provident Fund Scheme amounts to service and Members under the Employees Provident Fund Scheme  are consumers and Regional Provident Fund Commissioner renders the service”.

                 In the present complaint, the complainant is an employee of the OPs and, therefore, as per his complaint which remained un-rebutted by the OPs, he is entitled to receive gratuity  from the OPs under the Gratuity Act, 1972 . Therefore, OPs are service provider and the  complainant is their consumer.

7.             Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) is relevant in order to find out answer to issue No.2.  By the virtue of Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986(amended upto date), the Consumer Forum is also competent to adjudicate upon the present dispute  in addition to the competent authority under the payment of the Gratuity Act, 1972. So Consumer Forum is competent to adjudicate upon the above stated dispute.

8.          In the present complaint, the complainant claim remained unrebutted by the omission to file the version by  the OPs and  therefore, claim of the complainant stand proved.  The OPs did not pay  the required payment of gratuity to the complainant and, therefore, the OPs being service provider are held deficient in service towards the complainant who is their consumer.

 9.             In view of the above said discussion the complaint is hereby allowed. The OPs are directed to :-

(a)    pay to the complainant Rs.1,66,000/- ( Rs. one lac and sixty six thousand only) on account of payment of gratuity with interest @ 9% w.e.f 11.12.2014 till its actual realization.

(b)    pay to the complainant  Rs.10,000/- ( Rs. ten thousand only)  for mental agony and harassment.

(c)    pay to the complainant Rs.5,000/-( Rs. five thousand only) as costs of litigation.

 Compliance of this order be made within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Certified copies of the order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced.                           

July 07, 2015.