Delhi

North East

CC/100/2018

Sh. Kitab Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shiv Co-Operative Thriet & Credit Society Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

12 Jul 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 100/18

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

In the matter of:

 

	Shri Kitab Singh S/o Shri Randhir Singh R/o: H.No. 836, Mundhela Khurd Najafgarh, New Delhi-110073	Complainant
	Versus
	Shiv Co-Operative Thrift @ Credit Society Ltd. C-A 39, Gali No. 3 (1/3-A) Bhajanpura, Delhi-110053	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:       JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:               DATE OF DECISION      :

22.05.2018 07.06.2022 12.07.2022

 

ORDER

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the Complainant was working as Driver in Delhi Transport Corporation and he retired from the service in the month of October 2016. Complainant as well as three other persons, namely Shri Vikram Singh, Shri Vijay Kumar and Shri Sanjeev became members of the Opposite Party society i.e. Shiv Co-Operative Thrift @ Credit Society Ltd. The Complainant and his three co-employees named above took loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- each from the Opposite Party and they became the guarantor of each other in the said loan taken by them. It is alleged that Complainant had paid the entire loan amount along with interest and there was no dues left towards the Complainant. The borrower / member Shri Vijay Kumar who also took the loan unfortunately became disappeared. It is alleged that as per the notice of the Opposite Party under Rule 132 of DCS Rule 2007 in execution case no. 06/15/16/1319 dated 20.10.2015, the Opposite Party had deducted a sum of Rs. 55,000/- from the salary account of the Complainant. It is alleged that Opposite Party sent a notice to the department of Complainant to deduct a sum of Rs. 1,61,122/- from his gratuity amount. Accordingly, the department of the Complainant again deducted the amount. Complainant alleged that Opposite Party had recovered the amount of Rs. 1,26,360/- in respect of the loan amount i.e. Rs. 97,084. It is alleged that Complainant had paid the entire loan amount in monthly instalments of Rs. 6,000/-. It is alleged that Opposite Party had again illegally received a sum of Rs. 80,932/- including interest from the gratuity amount. Complaint sent a legal notice to Opposite Party on 02.05.2017. Opposite Party replied the said legal notice on 10.06.2017.
2. Complainant has prayed for issue direction to pay a sum of  Rs. 2,42,054/- @ 18% p.a. as taken the extra amount illegally. He has also claimed for Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation towards mental pain, agony, harassment. He has also claimed for Rs. 51,000/- as litigation charges.
3. Notice of the complaint was issued to the Opposite Party. Vide order dated 24.09.2018 right of the Opposite Party to file the written statement was closed.
4. During the proceedings one application U/s 11 of CPC 1986 was moved regarding jurisdiction of this Forum. The Complainant filed reply to the said application and relied upon the judgment dated 11.12.2003 of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Secretary, Thirumurugan Vs M. Lalitha (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors. in Appeal No. 92 of 1998.
5.  To prove his case the Complainant had filed his affidavit wherein he has supported his case as mentioned in the complaint.
6. We have heard the Learned Counsel for the Complainant. We have also perused the file. So many opportunities were to be given to the Opposite Party for addressing argument but none appeared on its behalf for addressing arguments.
7. In view of the judgment Secretary, Thirumurugan Vs M. Lalitha (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors. in Appeal No. 92 of 1998 (Supra), the complaint is maintainable before the Consumer Forum.
8. The case of the Complainant is that he had obtained loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- from Opposite Party  and he had repaid all the loan amount to the Opposite Party. One co-employee of the Complainant namely Shri Vijay Kumar has also obtained loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- and Complainant stood surety for Shri Vijay Kumar in respect of the said loan. It is the case of the Complainant that the Opposite Party has taken in total Rs, 4,23,422/- from the Complainant, whereas the actual amount which was payable Rs. 1,81,368/- as per the version of the Complainant the Opposite Party has obtained Rs. 2,42,054/- in excess. The allegations of the Complainant are supported by his affidavit. The Opposite Party did not file any reply/written statement nor any evidence filed by it. Therefore, the version of the Complainant has to be believed.
9. In view of the above discussion, it is ordered that Opposite Party shall pay an amount of Rs. 2,42,054/- (Rupees Two Lakh Forty Two Thousand Fifty Four  Only) to the Complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till its recovery. The Opposite Party shall also pay an amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant on account of mental harassment and legal expenses. This amount shall carry an interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of this order till the recovery of the said amount.
10.  Order announced on 12.07.2022.
11. Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.
12. File be consigned to Record Room.

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President