BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society (Regd.) filed a consumer case on 25 Mar 2010 against Rajamma in the Kolar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/09/80 and the judgment uploaded on 30 Nov -0001.
Karnataka
Kolar
CC/09/80
BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society (Regd.) - Complainant(s)
Versus
Rajamma - Opp.Party(s)
25 Mar 2010
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/09/80
BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society (Regd.)
...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
Medical Officer Rajamma
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
CC Filed on 08.09.2009 Disposed on 19.04.2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR. Dated: 19th day of April 2010 PRESENT: Sri. G.V.HEGDE, President. Sri. T.NAGARAJA, Member. Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, Member. --- Consumer Complaint No. 80/2009 Between: BEML Employees Credit Co-operative Society (Regd.), Maharaja Road, Robertsonpet, Kolar Gold Fields. Represented by its: Secretary. .Complainant V/S 1. Rajamma, Community Health Centre, Mulbagal, Kolar District. 2. The Medical Officer, Community Health Centre, Mulbagal, Kolar District. .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 16.09.2003 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 remained absent, though served with notice. The notice on OP.1 could not be served as she had left the address. 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 and 2 have not filed any version. The undertaking dated 28.08.2003 given by the concerned Pay Disbursing Officer-OP.2 states that he would regularly deduct the installments out of the salary of OP.1 and he would intimate the subsequent Pay Disbursing Officer to deduct the same in the event of the transfer of OP.1 and to clear the entire loan amount before making final settlement to the employee in the event of VRS/resignation/superannuation of the employee. The records produced by complainant show that at the time of grant of loan OP.1 was aged about 53 and there remained only 4 years of service. As already noted the loan was granted on 16.09.2003. Therefore by this time OP.1 must have been retired from service due to superannuation. In such circumstance we think if the pensionary benefit is not finally settled OP.2 may be directed to clear the entire loan amount out of the pensionary benefits payable to OP.1. Hence we pass the following: O R D E R The complaint is allowed. OP.2 is directed to deduct the entire loan amount still due from OP.1 to complainant-society, out of the pensionary benefits payable to OP.1 if the same is not paid already. The parties shall bear their own costs. Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced in open Forum this the 19th day of April 2010. MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.