Karnataka

Mysore

CC/09/195

T.R. Prameshaiah - Complainant(s)

Versus

Member Secretary & Managing Director - Opp.Party(s)

Inperson

05 Aug 2009

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MYSORE
No.1542/F, Anikethana Road, C and D Block, J.C.S.T. Layout, Kuvempunagara, (Behind Jagadamba Petrol Bunk), Mysore-570009.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/195

T.R. Prameshaiah
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Member Secretary & Managing Director
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi 2. Sri A.T.Munnoli3. Sri. Shivakumar.J.

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J. B.A., L.L.B., - Member CC 195/09 DATED 05.08.2009 ORDER Complainant T.R.Parameshaiah, No.191, Sriram Road, Khille Mohalla, Mysore-4. (INPERSON) Vs. Opposite Party Member Secretary, General Common Cadre Committee, Mysore-Chamarajanagar District, & Managing Director, Mysore Chamaraja Nagar DCC Bank, Ashoka Road, Neharu Circle, Mysore. (By Sri D.S.S. Advcoate) Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service Date of filing of complaint : 04.06.2009 Date of appearance of O.P. : 29.06.2009 Date of order : 05.08.2009 Duration of Proceeding : 1 MONTH 7 DAYS PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER Sri. A.T.Munnoli, President 1. The grievance of the complainant as alleged is, that he was serving in Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha as Secretary from 22.08.1969. He was directed to keep security deposit of Rs.1,100/-. Accordingly every month Rs.10/- has been deducted from his salary. No interest on the security deposit has been paid to the complainant. As per Government Order No.RDC-27/CLM 80 (viii) dated 05.09.1980, the opposite party came into existence and the complainant comes in its jurisdiction. On 01.02.2006, the complainant retired from the post of Manager. Complainant had written letter to the opposite party to get the security deposit amount transferred to it from the Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha on 06.10.1997. On 10.11.2008, the complainant had written another letter for payment of the security deposit with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. Finally, one more letter dated 30.04.2009 was written, but the opposite party has neither replied nor paid the amount. On these grounds, it is prayed to order for payment of Rs.12,093/- from the opposite party with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. 2. The opposite party has appeared through advocate and filed objections, contending that the complainant is not a Consumer as defined under the Act and the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant was an employee of the Co-operative Society, deposited the security deposit in terms of the employment conditions. As per the Section 70 and 118 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, the complainant has to approached the Registrar of Co-operative Society. Further, it is contended that the Society, in which the complainant had deposited the amount was liquidated and a liquidator has been appointed. Audit of the accounts of the said Society is pending since 1983. Only after completion of the audit of the accounts, the repayment of the security deposit can be considered by the said Society. Without prejudice to the above contentions, it is stated that the opposite party is not liable for payment of the said security deposit since that has not been transfer to the opposite party and that amount is still lying with the Co-operative Society, K.R.Nagar, in which the complainant was serving. The complainant is at liberty to approach the said Society to get back the security deposit in accordance with law. Without approaching the said Society, the complainant has rushed to this Forum, but he is not entitled to get the relief. 3. The complainant as well as opposite party have filed affidavits and also have produced certain documents shown in the lists. We have heard the arguments of both and perused the records. 4. On the above contentions, following points for determination arise. 1. Whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and is entitled for Rs.12,093/- or any amount? 2. What order? 5. Our findings are as under:- Point no.1 : In the negative. Point no.2 : As per the order. REASONS 6. Point no. 1:- There is no dispute that complainant had deposited Rs.1,100/- as security deposit, which has been deducted from his salary as per the service condition. Admittedly that amount is laid with Town Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Ltd. K.R.Nagar. As per the Government Order, the opposite party Committee was formed, but the fact remains that the security deposit of the complainant remained with the Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha, K.R.Nagar. When that security deposit remained with the said Co-operative Society, which has not been transfer to the opposite party, at the outset the liability on the opposite party to refund it to the complainant has not been made out by the complainant. More over, the contention of the opposite party that said Society has been liquidated and liquidator was appointed and the audit of the accounts of the said Society since 1983 is pending is not denied or disputed by the complainant. Also, it is relevant to note that, it is not made out by the complainant that the opposite party was under any obligation to get that security deposit transferred to it. In this regard, no provision of law is pointed out by the complainant. Taking into consideration of all the facts and material on record, we found no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Accordingly we answer point no.1 in the negative. 7. Point No. 2:- In view of the finding on first point, we pass the following order: ORDER 1. The Complaint is dismissed. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha in accordance with law. 2. No costs. 3. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 5th August 2009) (A.T.Munnoli) President (Y.V.Uma Shenoi) Member (Shivakumar.J.) Member




......................Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi
......................Sri A.T.Munnoli
......................Sri. Shivakumar.J.