IN THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BELAGAVI.
Dated this 23rd day of August 2016
Complaint No.122/2015
Present: 1) Shri. B.V.Gudli, President.
2) Smt. Sunita Member
-***-
Complainant:
Shri. Kallappa S/o. Doddappa Agasar,
Age: 62 years, Occ: Pensioner,
R/o: Kakati, Tq/Dist. Belagavi.
(By Sri. M. S. Patil, Advocate).
V/s.
Opponents:1) The Chairman,
The Belgaum Postal & R.M.S. Dn. Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Belgaum, Gotadki Building, Station Road, Belgaum
(O.P-1 is placed ex-parte,)
2) The Secretary,
The Belgaum Postal & R.M.S. Dn. Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Belgaum, Gotadki Building, Station Road, Belgaum
(By Sri.R.B.Bogar, Adv)
(Order dictated by Smt. Sunita, Member)
ORDER
The complainant has filed the complaint u/s.12 of the C.P. Act against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service of non payment Share Capital amount.
2) In-spite service of notice, O.P-1 has remained absent. Hence placed ex-parte. OP-2 appeared through his counsel but did not filed any objection and affidavit.
3) In support of the claim made in the complaint, the complainant has filed his affidavit and produced other documents. We have heard the argument of complainant’s Advocate and perused the records.
4) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and entitled to the reliefs sought?
5) Our finding on the point is partly in affirmative for the following reasons.
REASONS
6) On perusal contents of the complaint and affidavit filed by the complainant, The complainant states that the complainant was joined the post office as a STG postman on 5/3/1981 and from the date of appointment till the date of retirement upto 31/5/2012 he was done his duty to the entire satisfaction of the postal department. The complainant further alleged that, during the course of employment he was paid share capital of Rs.200/- for every month which comes to Rs.41,000/- till 31/5/2012 in OP’s Society. The complainant further alleged that, after retirement from service, the complainant was approached to the OP’s society and requested for the payment of share capital but the OP’s are postponed the same one and other reason. Lastly on 16/1/2015 the complainant approached to the opponent society and requested to the opponents for the immediate release of share capital amount with interest but the OP’s instead of making the payment with interest refused and advised to the complainant to better approach to the competent court of law for entitlement of share capital. Hence complainant constrained to file this complaint against opponent society.
7) Lastly fed up with the opponents behavior the complainant has issued legal notice through his advocate on 27/1/2015 calling upon the opponents for the immediate release of share capital amount with interest. The notice was duly served to opponents but opponents not replied nor make the payment of share amount with interest till today. Thus opponents caused deficiency of service on the part of the opponents .
8) On perusal documents produced by the complainant, he had paid share capital of Rs.200/- for every month from joining of the service which comes to Rs.41,000/- till 31/5/2012 in OP’s Society. On perusal evidence affidavit of the complainant and the contention in the complaint we can notice that the complainant has claimed the share capital amount of Rs. 41,000/- as on 31/5/2012 with interest but as per the receipt produced by the complainant, the Share capital amount is of Rs.40,600/- as on 31/3/2012 and as per the pay slip No. 4, Bill No. 2 and AR No.17 and 74 the complainant has paid Rs.200/- for two months share amount i.e. April 2012 and May 2012 and as on 31/5/2012 the total share capital amount is of Rs. 41,000/- as per the contention of the complaint has to be believed and accepted. Hence after going through the document we are of the opinion that, the complainant is entitle for Rs. 41,000/- as on 31/5/2012 with interest. In-spite service of notice, O.P-1 has remained absent. Hence placed ex-parte and OP-2 appeared through his counsel but did not filed any objection and affidavit. Hence it is well settled legal position that non payment of the share capital amount, amounts to deficiency in service.
9) Taking into consideration of the facts, evidence on record and the discussion made here before deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. have been proved.
10) Taking in to consideration of various aspects and the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (2011) SCCR 268 and of the Hon’ble Apex Commission reported in 2013 (2) CPR 574 as well as other subsequent decisions absolutely it is just and necessary to impose cost on daily basis if order remains uncomplied within the period fixed for compliance of the order, so as to have feeling and pinch.
11) Accordingly, following order.
ORDER
The complaint is partly allowed.
The O.Ps. represented by Chairman and Secretary are hereby directed and liable to pay the share capital amount of Rs.41,000/- with future interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from 1/4/2012 till realization of entire amount to the complainant.
Further the O.Ps. are represented by Chairman and Secretary are hereby directed and liable to pay sum of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant towards costs of the proceedings.
Order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of the order.
If the order is not complied within stipulated period, O.Ps. are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.50/- per day to the complainant from the date of disobedience of order, till the order is complied.
(Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on:23rd day of August 2016)
Member President.
