The BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. filed a consumer case on 10 Nov 2009 against Muniraj, in the Kolar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/09/157 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
Karnataka
Kolar
CC/09/157
The BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. - Complainant(s)
Versus
Muniraj, - Opp.Party(s)
10 Nov 2009
ORDER
THE DISTRICT CONSUMAR DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM No.419, Ist Floor,. H.N. Gowda Building, M.B.Road, Kolar-563101 consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/157
The BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society Ltd.
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
Muniraj, The Medical Officer
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
CC Filed on 29.09.2009 Disposed on 22.01.2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR. Dated: 22nd day of January 2010 PRESENT: Sri. G.V.HEGDE, President. Sri. T.NAGARAJA, Member. Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, Member. --- Consumer Complaint No. 157/2009 Between: BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society (Regd.), Maharaja Road, Robertsonpet, Kolar Gold Fields. Represented by its: Secretary. .Complainant V/S 1. Sri. Muniraj, Primary Health Centre P.H.C, Kamasamudram. 2. The Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre P.H.C, Kamasamudram. .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.2 to effect prompt deduction of the loan installments as undertaken by him 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 18.03.2003 agreeing to repay the loan and interest in 53 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 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. 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. 3. In response to the notices issued by this Forum, OP.1 and 2 appeared on the first date of hearing and thereafter they remained absent. They have not filed any version. 4. The averments in the complaint may be believed to be true as OP.1 and 2 though appeared subsequently remained absent. The undertaking given by OP.2 dated 08.03.2003 states that OP.2 would regularly deduct the installments out of the salary of OP.1. But OP.2 did not deduct the installments as agreed. The violation of it amounts to deficiency in service. Hence we pass the following: O R D E R 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. The parties shall bear their own costs. Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced in open Forum this the 22nd day of January 2010. MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.