SRI.K. VIJAYAKUMARAN, PRESIDENT. This is a complaint for realization of benefits under the one time settlement, compensation and costs. The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows: The complainant is the power of attorney holder of his son Priya Kumar who was a subscriber of Chitty No.12/97-31 conducted by the 2nd opp.party. The said Priya Kumar has availed a loan of Rs.35,000/- from the chitty on 24.3.1998 furnishing security of immovable property. The complainant could not remit the instalments regularly as he was laid up and as on 31.3.2001 and prior to that he was a defaulter under the OTS scheme Those who are defaulters are entitled to get the benefit which the complainant is also entitled to get. The complainant remitted money prior to 31.3.2001. The benefit under the OTS was extended up to December 2003. The complainant on 9/01, 12/2001, 6/03, 9/03 remitted money in the office of the 2nd opp.party. On 26.9.2003 the complainant at the time of settling the transaction requested the opp.party to give the benefits of one time settlement. But he was told to remit the amount and the benefits under the OTS will be given subsequently. Accordingly he remitted Rs. 54077 on 26.9.2003 and closed the account but he was not given the benefit which he is legally entitled to get . Hence the complaint. The opp.parties filed a joint version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The averment in para one of the complaint is not true. The chitty was subscribed by Priya Kumar, S/o. the complainant and the loan was also taken by the said Priya Kumar. The complainant is the power of attorney holder only. The chitty commenced on 6.8.07 and terminated on 6.11.2003. The said Priya Kumar availed a loan under the chitty No. NCL 280/98 and executed agreement on 24.3.98 agreeing to pay 20% interest for the loan amount. The averments in para 2 and 3 of the complaint are false and hence denied. The loanee had remitted Rs.146/- on 24.3.98 Rs.6074/- on 6.2.98, Rs.2000/- on 31.3.2000, Rs.222/- on 11.8.2000, Rs. 5572/- on 12.9.2001, Rs.9000 on 1.12.2001 and Rs.4000/- on 28.6.03. The party had remitted the balance amount and settled and closed the account on 26.9.03. The averments in para 4 of the complaint is also not true. The loanee had remitted the balance amount and interest on26;.9.03 with his free will and received the security document. The averments in para 5 to 13 of the complaint are also denied. The complainant has submitted a request after settlement of account for granting interest concession under OTS Scheme. On 31.3.2001 the account of the loanee disclosed an unadjusted credit balance of Rs.262/- as per the Directives. The amount defaulted on or before 31.3.2001 are only included under the OTS Scheme , hence the account of the loanee was closed without granting OTS concession. The ledger balance as on 31.3.2001 of the loanee is at Rs. 49,647/- out of which the loan amount is Rs. 35,000/- and defaulted interest is at Rs. 14,647/-. As per the circulars of the first opp.party the 2nd opp.party had calculated the interest as per the circular No.113/03 dated 4.8.2003. Eligibility for OTS concession other than chitty is allowed only to those defaulters whose date of default is on or before 31.3.2001. In this case the loanee had no default as on 31.3.2001 and was having credit balance of Rs.262/- as per the directives. Hence the loanee herein is not entitled to get concession under OTS circulars. The above facts are duly communicated to the complainant. The complainant has no cause of action against the opp.parties. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties. Hence the opp.party prays to dismiss the complaint Points that would arise for consideration are: 1. Whether or not the complainant is eligible to get the benefits under OTS Scheme? 2. Whether or not there is deficiency in the service on the part of opp.parties? 3. Reliefs and costs. For the complainant PW.1 was examined. Ext.P1 to P12 were marked. For the opp.parties DW.1 was examined. Ext. D1 to D13 were marked. Points: The son of the complainant was a subscriber of the chitty conducted by the 2nd opp.party and that he has availed a loan from the chitty are not disputed. The complainant is the power of Attorney holder of his son Priya Kumar, is also not disputed. It is also not in dispute that the complainant has closed the said loan on 26.9.03 The grievance of the complainant is that he was not given the benefits of OTS as per Ext. D4 despite the fact that he was a defaulter as on 31.3.2001. It is an admitted fact that defaulters of loan as on 31.3.2001 or before are entitled to get the benefits of OTS under Ext. D4. The complainant was a defaulter can be seen from the fact he has closed the loan of Rs.35,000/- remitting Rs.54077/- In the version as well as in the chief affidavit opp.party 2 has also admitted that the complainant was a defaulter and that the ledger balance as on 31.3.2001 of the complainant was Rs.49,647/- out of which Rs.35,000/- was the loan amount and Rs.14.647/- was the interest. The statement of calculation of interest shows that the credit balance of Rs.262/- in the account of the complainant is after the remittance of Rs.4000/- on 28.6.2003 . It is not forth coming from that statement what was the mode adopted for calculating interest. DW.1 has admitted in cross examination in page 2 that the complainant was a defaulter as per the ledger. To use his own words 31.3.2001 ujH 49647&% goe due Kn\mlujgkr\rk Lr\rk ledger YedlgA dkmjCjD]lgR Llnk\ But he would say in further cross examination that the complainant was not a defaulter as per the circular. In further cross examination in page 3 he would say 31.3.2001 H dmjCjD]lG]k\ Ll cG]khyjsRy [Ext.D4] benefit dj}kA Ext.D4 shows that OTS facility was made available to all chronic defaulter in all schemes of the company other than chitty whose date of default commenced on or before 30..6.2000 and that concession was available upto 31.4.2003. As per Ext.D4 the said concession was extended from 1.8.2003 to 31.10.2003. The complainant has closed the account paying the entire amount on 26.9.2003 which is within the period referred to in Ext. D4. After admitting that the complainant is a defaulter and the ledger of the complainant also shows that the complaint is a defaulter the opp.parties cannot deny the benefit as per Ext. D4 to the complainant based on certain calculations. The question is whether as on 31.3.2001 the complainant was a defaulter or not and after admitting that he is a defaulter the benefit of OTS under Ext. D4 cannot be denied on the ground that as on 26.6.2003 he has a credit balance of Rs.262/-. The question to be considered is as on 31.3.2001 whether or not he was a defaulter and not after adjusting the interest from the payments subsequently made by the defaulter. Ext. D10 makes it abundantly clear that the benefit under Ext. D4 was demanded by the complainant. When a defaulter makes payments of arrears such payments shall not be accounted in a way so as to deprive him of a benefit accrued to the defaulter. We are of the considered view that the arrears as per the ledger is to be taken into account to ascertain as to whether a person is a defaulter or not. For all that has been discussed above we find that the complaint is entitled to the benefits as per Ext.D4 and that there is deficiency in service on the side of the opp.parties. In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opp.party to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.7622/- with interest @ 12 % per annum from 26.9.2003 till payment and Rs.2500/- towards compensation and costs. The order is to be complied with within one month from the date of this order. Dated this the 29th day of June, 2009. . I n d e x List of witnesses for the complainant PW.1. –Gangadharan Nair List of documents for the complainant P1. – Power of Attorney P2. – Copy of the notice of R.R. P3. – Notice dated 6.10.2004 P4. – Notice copy dated 3.1.2002 P5. – Letter dated 1.8.2002 P6. – Letter dated 31..8..2002 P7. – Revenue Recovery notice P8. - Paper cutting P9. – Receipt P10.- Copy of Letter to complainant dated 21.1.04 P11. – Statements of accounts P12. – Statement of account prepared by complain List of witnesses for the opp. Party List of witnesses for the opp.party DW.1. – Muraleedharan List of documents for the opp.party D1. – Photocopy of Loan application D2. - Chitty Loan agreement D3. – Extract of Ledger D4. – circular dated 4.8.2003 D5. – Circular No. 45A 1/4/03 D6. – Circular No.73 of 2003 D7. – Dircular dated 5.9.2001 D8. – Circular No.157/01 D9. – Circular dated 24.9.01 D10. – Letter sent by Senior Manager to the Senior Manager. HO., Trichur. D11. – Letter dated 20.10.2003 D12. – Copy of letter dated 21.1.2004 D13. – Statement of accounts. | 
