Andhra Pradesh

Kurnool

CC/33/2010

Smt. M.Jayamma, W/o Late M.Lakshminarayana - Complainant(s)

Versus

The President, Devanakonda Large Sized - Opp.Party(s)

L.Viswanadham

01 Mar 2011

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/33/2010
 
1. Smt. M.Jayamma, W/o Late M.Lakshminarayana
Resident of H.No.69/1, Boggula Street, Devanakonda Village and Mandal, Kurnool District.
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The President, Devanakonda Large Sized
Co-operative Society, Devanakonda Village Mandal, Kurnool District
Kurnool
Andhra Pradesh
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com., B.L. PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sri.M.Kirshna Reddy, M.Sc, M.Phil., MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah , B.Com B.L., President

And

Sri. M.Krishna  Reddy , M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member

Tuesday the 1st day of March, 2011

C.C.No 33/10

Between:

Smt. M.Jayamma, W/o Late M.Lakshminarayana,

Resident of H.No.69/1, Boggula Street, Devanakonda Village and Mandal, Kurnool District.                                       

 

        …..Complainant

                                                                    

                                         -Vs-

The President, Devanakonda Large Sized

Co-operative Society, Devanakonda Village  Mandal, Kurnool District.                       

 

                             OPPOSITE PARTy

 

 

          This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri. L.Viswanadham, Advocate for complainant, and               Sri M. Sivaji Rao, Advocate for opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.

   ORDER

(As per Sri. M.Krishna  Reddy, Male Member)

C.C. No. 33/10

 

1.     The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of C. P. Act, 1986, praying a direction on opposite party for the payment of

(a)    Rs.3,37,715/- being all the dues,

 

(b)    Rs. 20,000/- compensation for mental agony.

 

(c)    And the cost of the case.

 

2.     The synopsis of complainant case is that Jayamma is the widow of Late M.Lakshminarayana, who worked as secretary in the society of opposite party and died while in service on 17-05-2008.  The complainant avered that her husband was appointed and confirmed by the opposite party as per the bye laws and service conditions of the society taking cash security and collateral security.  After the death of her husband, she being legal hair, applied for the sanction of death benefits to a tune of Rs.2,95,715/- which includes salary Rs.28,316/- gratuity Rs.1,00,809/-, cash deposit Rs.10,000/- and collateral security deposit Rs.50,000/-.  The opposite party did not pay above said amounts and directed her to approach higher authorities as the matter does not fall with in his purview.  The complainant also stated that the opposite party since was defeted in C.C.No.124/2004 of this Forum by her husband on 12-08-2008, developed grudge against her and creating problems intentionally.  Divisional Co-operative Officer on the return request of the complainant in his letters R.C.No.648/2008 dated 05-08-2008 and 13-05-2009 directed opposite party to settle the issue of the complainant. As the opposite party did not respond, she also approached Joint Register seeking his instructions to solve the matter.  No action was taken to the letter R.C.No.4416/2005 dated 27-06-2009 of Joint Register.  The complainant also approached Legal Services Authority, Pattikonda, through a representation to the Second Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Adoni to settle the issue, but all the efforts of the complainant become futile.  Disgusted with attitude of opposite party, the complainant got issued a legal notice to the opposite party on 10-07-2009.  The opposite party after the receipt of legal notice paid of Rs.20,300/- equal to three months salary to the complainant  before Lok Adalat at Pattiknoda.  The complainant is also entitled Rs.42,000/- being encashment of earned leave.  As the opposite party did not take any further steps to settle the dues, this complaint is filed in the Forum claiming appropriate reliefs.   

 

3.     The complainant filed Sworn Affidavit and documents marked as Ex.A1 to A9 to support his claim.

 

4.     In pursuance of the notice of this Forum, opposite party filed his written version denying his liability to the complainants claim. Briefly, the opposite party said that the claim of the complainant for salary, gratuity, cash deposit, collateral security deposit, Earned Leave encashment etc, will not come under the purview of C.P. Act 1986, as Forum can not decide this type of disputes.  The opposite party avered that the complainant’s husband worked as secretary in opposite parties society, deposited cash, furnished collateral security is falls.  The complainant has to prove that her husband worked in opposite party society as permanent employee, and his entitlement of salary, gratuity, refund of cash deposit and collateral security deposit, earned leave encashment as per bye laws service conditions of the opposite party society.  The opposite party submitted that the statements that Divisional Co-operative Officer in R.C.No.648/2008 and Joint Register in R.C.No.4416/2005 directed for the settlement of the issue are false, further they informed him to look in to the matter of the complainant as per the society bye laws and service conditions.  As the complainant husband was not permanent employee of the society and is not entitled the benefits as claimed by her.  Further the opposite party said that he is not connected with the claims, claimed by the complainant and he has no grudge against her.  The opposite party avered that the staff pattern as per the bye laws is, Secretary, Accountant Cum Clerk, Attender/Watchmen and the post of private secretary is not included.  Opposite party further submitted that the complainant husband was appointed as private secretary on temporary and contract basis by the previous body without extending the benefits of a permanent employee and for the period worked, he was paid entire salary dues.  The opposite party also alleged that the deceased employee committed some financial irregularities with the amounts of society members and steps to recover or to be taken against the complainant. The opposite party therefore prayed that this dispute does not fall with in the definition of ‘service’ and this frivolous complaint is liable for dismissal with cost.

 

5.     The opposite party filed sworn affidavit and document marked as Ex.B1 in his support.

 

6.     Both parties filed their written arguments and submitted their oral arguments.

 

7.     Hence the points for consideration are.

(a)    Whether the complainant has made out any deficiency on the part of opposite party sustaining its liability to his claim?

(b)    What is the amount of compensation that can be awarded to him?

Ex.A1 to A9 establish that the complainant husband worked as secretary in Devanakonda Large Sized Co-operative Society, died on 17-05-2008 and legal hires of the deceased, to received the death benefits.  Divisional Co-operative Officer and Joint Register, District   Co-operative Office, Kurnool through their letters Ex.A3 to A5 also requested the president of the said society to settle the issue as per bye laws and conditions.  Ex.B1 in copy of bye laws (2005) and service conditions of employees.  As per Ex.B1 the complainant husband was appointed as private secretary which is not included in the staff pattern under Chapter III Clause (2) and hence the opposite party contended that the deceased was not a regular employee and was not made permanent, so he is not entitled for death benefits.  The opposite party also filed citations IV (2008) C.P.J 146 (NC) and R.P.214/1993 (NC) in which it is stated that the claim of gratuity, leave encashment etc of an employee would not fall under the definition of a consumer as defined in section 2 (i) d (ii) of the CP Act 1986.  In this case there is dispute in the designation of the deceased and the applicability of rulers of a permanent employee to the deceased, hence need more defiled study. More over the payments of gratuity, leave encashment would not be covered under see 2 (i) d (ii) of the C.P. Act 1986.  From what is sated above this Forum holds that there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party and the complaint has no jurisdiction to entertain.

 

11.    In the result, the complaint is dismissed with out cost directing the complainant to approach the appropriate Forum for redressal.

 

Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 1st day of March, 2011.

         Sd/-                                                                                       Sd/-

MALEMEMBER                                                               PRESIDENT

 

       APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

 

For the complainant : Nil            For the opposite party : Nill

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

Ex.A1               Death Certificate of Late M.Lakshminarayana

dated 07-06-2008.

 

Ex.A2.       Family Members certificate dated 11-06-2008.

 

Ex.A3        Office copy of R.C.No.648/2008-A(C) dated 05-08-2008 of Divisional Co-operative Officer, Adoni.

 

Ex.A4                R.C.No.648/2008-A(C) dated 13-05-2009 of Divisional

Co-operative Officer, Adoni.

 

Ex.A5                R.C.No.4416/2005-C dated 27-06-2009 of District

Co-operative Officer, Kurnool.

 

Ex.A6                Photo copy of legal notice dated 10-07-2009.

 

Ex.A7                Speed post receipts (3).

 

Ex.A8                Postal Acknowledgements (3).

 

Ex.A9                Photo copy of letter addressed to opposite party.

 

List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:-  

 

 

Ex.B1        Photo copy of Society Bye laws-2005 and service conditions of employees.

 

 

 

               Sd/-                                                                          Sd/-

     MALE MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT

 

 

// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the

A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//

 

Copy to:-

 

Complainant and Opposite parties  :

Copy was made ready on             :

Copy was dispatched on               :

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com., B.L.]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri.M.Kirshna Reddy, M.Sc, M.Phil.,]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.