The BEML Employees Credit filed a consumer case on 02 Sep 2010 against R. Vinolia in the Kolar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/10/71 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
Karnataka
Kolar
CC/10/71
The BEML Employees Credit - Complainant(s)
Versus
R. Vinolia - Opp.Party(s)
02 Sep 2010
ORDER
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum District Office Premises, Kolar 563 101. consumer case(CC) No. CC/10/71
The BEML Employees Credit
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
Lay Secretary R. Vinolia
...........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. 71/2010 Between: BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society (Regd.), Maharaja Road, Robertsonpet, Kolar Gold Fields. Represented by its: Secretary. .Complainant V/S 1. Smt. R. Vinolia, S.N.R Hospital, Kolar. 2. The Asst. Administrative Officer, S.N.R Hospital, Kolar. .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 25.11.2003 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.2 appeared and stated that OP.1 is retired from service on 31.01.2008 and the pension benefits of OP.1 are not yet settled. OP.1 served but remained absent. The complainant filed affidavit in support of the allegations made in the complaint. 4. The averments in the complaint may be believed to be true as OP.1 remained absent and OP.2 does not dispute the issue of salary deduction certificate dated 17.09.2003 which states that OP.2 would regularly deduct the installments out of the salary of OP.1 and in the event of the retirement of OP.1, the OP.2 would deduct the outstanding loan amount before making final settlement of the pension of the employee. OP.2 stated before this Forum through its letter dated 14.06.2010 that a request is made for deduction of the outstanding loan to the pension approving authority. Hence we pass the following: O R D E R The complaint is allowed. OP.2 is directed to settle the entire loan outstanding from OP.1 to complainant out of the pensionary benefits that may be payable to OP.1 as may be permissible under Law on settlement of the pensionary benefits. 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.