CC Filed on 12.07.2010<br /> Disposed on 02.11.2010<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR.<br /> <br /> Dated: 02nd day of November 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT:<br /> Sri. G.V.HEGDE, President.<br /> <br /> Sri. T.NAGARAJA, Member.<br /> Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, Member.<br /> ---<br /> <br /> Consumer Complaint No. 108/2010<br /> <br /> Between:<br /> <br /> <br /> BEML Employees Credit <br /> Co-operative Society (Regd.),<br /> Maharaja Road,<br /> Robertsonpet,<br /> Kolar Gold Fields.<br /> <br /> Represented by its:<br /> Secretary. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ….Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> <br /> 1. Mary Vinolia,<br /> St. Joseph Convent,<br /> Tamil Higher Primary School,<br /> Champion Reefs,<br /> KGF – 563 117.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. The Head Mistress,<br /> St. Joseph Convent,<br /> Tamil Higher Primary School,<br /> Champion Reefs,<br /> KGF – 563 117. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ….Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> ORDERS<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying for a direction against the opposite party No.2 to effect prompt deduction of the loan installments as undertaken by him and to credit the same to complainant-society with costs, etc.,<br /> <br /> 2. The material facts of complainant’s case may be stated as follows:<br /> 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.20,000/- on 29.09.2003 agreeing to repay the loan and interest in 36 monthly installments of Rs.800/- 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 has been working under OP.2 who is Pay Disbursing Officer and that OP.2 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 OP.2 failed to deduct the said installments as undertaken and to remit to complainant-society. The undertaking letter dated 20.01.2003 issued by the then Pay Disbursing Officer stated that in the event of superannuation/termination of OP.1 the entire loan amount outstanding to complainant would be settled before making final payment to the employee-OP.1. It is alleged 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. <br /> <br /> 3. In response to the notices issued by this Forum, both OPs appeared through counsel and version of OP.1 is filed. The complainant filed the affidavit in support of averments made in the complaint. OP.1 did not lead any evidence.<br /> <br /> 4. In the version OP.1 borrowing of the loan is not disputed. It is contended that the complainant had issued total in 20 shares each worth Rs.100/- and that the complainant has not paid any dividend on the shares to this date. OP.1 has further contended that as on 11.07.2007 there was an outstanding due of Rs.16,983/- payable to complainant but not the amount claimed in the complaint. She further contended that the share amount of Rs.2,000/- may be charged with interest and the total of it may be deducted towards the outstanding balance payable to complainant and that she is ready to pay the balance if any. <br /> <br /> 5. From the above pleadings and evidence we hold that the OP.1 is still due a large amount. The records show that she is at the verge of retirement. OP.1 is at liberty to get the particulars of loan account and the payment made by her from the complainant and she can point out the arithmetical errors if any in arriving the balance due to complainant. <br /> <br /> 6. At the time of availing the loan OP.1 was working as Asst. Mistress. It appears for the present she is the Head Mistress and also the Pay Disbursing Officer. In the capacity of Pay Disbursing Officer she committed deficiency in service by not remitting the installments due. She should have been more careful when she herself was the loanee as well as the Pay Disbursing Officer who undertook to deduct the installments out of the salary. It appears for the present the salary of OP.1 is considerably increased. Hence we pass the following:<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed. OP.2 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. In the event of retirement of OP.1 the entire balance of loan shall be paid out of the retiral benefits of OP.1 and credited to the complainant-society as undertaken earlier. The parties shall bear their own costs. <br /> <br /> Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced in open Forum this the 02nd day of November 2010.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br />