The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum District Office Premises, Kolar 563 101. consumer case(CC) No. CC/10/55
The BEML Employees Credit
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
Laxmi Narasimaiah Supritendent Taluk Social Welfare Officer
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
CC Filed on 11.05.2010 Disposed on 23.09.2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR. Dated: 23rd day of September 2010 PRESENT: Sri. G.V.HEGDE, President. Sri. T.NAGARAJA, Member. Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, Member. --- Consumer Complaint No. 55/2010 Between: BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society (Regd.), Maharaja Road, Robertsonpet, Kolar Gold Fields. Represented by its: Secretary. V/S 1. Sri. Laxmi Narasimaiah, Taluk Social Welfare Office, Srinivasapur Taluk, Kolar. 2. The Taluk Social Welfare Officer, Taluk Social Welfare Office, Srinivasapur Taluk, Kolar. 3. The Superintendent, Nirashritara Parihara Kendra, Magadi Road, Bangalore. .Complainant .Opposite Parties ORDERS This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying for a direction against the opposite party No.3 to effect prompt deduction of the loan installments as undertaken by OP.2 and to credit the same to complainant-society with costs, etc., 2. The material facts of complainants case may be stated as follows: That the complainant is a credit co-operative society and OP.1 who is working as a government servant, is an associate member of complainant-society and that OP.1 had borrowed Rs.50,000/- on 11.03.2003 while he was working under OP.2 agreeing to repay the loan and interest in 54 monthly installments of Rs.1,400/- and in default agreeing to pay overdue interest at one and a quarter time the ordinary rate of interest from the due date to the date of regularization of payment. Further that OP.1 was working under OP.2, who was Pay Disbursing Officer and that the said officer had undertaken to deduct the installments becoming due out of the salary payable to OP.1 and to remit the same to complainant-society and that he failed to deduct the said installments as undertaken and to remit to complainant-society and that he had also undertaken to instruct the subsequent Pay Disbursing Officer to effect the deduction in the event of the transfer of OP.1 to any other place. It is made out that for the present OP.1 has been working under OP.3, who is the present Pay Disbursing Officer. It is made out that OP.2 or OP.3 has not effected deduction of installments and that OP.1 has also failed to repay the loan and the installments. It is alleged that for the present certain amount is outstanding in the said loan account of OP.1. 3. The notices issued by this Forum were served on all the OPs. But they did not appear before this Forum. OP.1 who is the loanee appears to be the Pay Disbursing Officer for himself and now he is working in the office of OP.3. OP.1 addressed a letter to this Forum stating that he paid Rs.20,000/- after receipt of notice from this Forum and he would pay the remaining balance in short time. Therefore we can believe the borrowing of the loan and the terms regarding its repayment. OP.1 is at liberty to pay the entire balance as early as possible so as to save him from paying higher interest. Hence we pass the following: O R D E R The complaint is allowed. OP.3 is directed to deduct Rs.1,400/- per month out of the monthly salary payable to OP.1 and to credit the same to complainant-society till the closure of loan. The parties shall bear their own costs. Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced in open Forum this the 23rd day of September 2010. MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
