Complaint No. : 391/2008 Filed on : 15/09/2008 Decided on : 30/10/2009 Duration : 01 years 01 months 15 days BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM COLLECTOR OFFICE, ROOM NO. 214, IIND FLOOR, THANE) Shri. Mohammedin R. Shah R/at. Shivaji Nagar, Datguru Chawl, R.No.10, MarolPipeline, Mumbai 400 059. ..Complainant V/s. 1.Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Regional Provident Fund Office, Vardhman Commercial Complex, 6th Floor, MIDC, Road no. 16, Wagle Estate, Thane(W) 400604. ..Opponent
CORUM : HON'BLE PRESIDENT :SAU. SHASHIKALA S.PATIL HON'BLE MEMBER :MR. P. N. SHIRSAT Complainant through Adv. Krishna Kumar MishraOpponent through Adv. Sunil Surana J U D G E M E N T (30th October 2009) HON'BLE MEMBER : MR. P. N. SHIRSAT 1. Complaint is filed under Consumer Protection Act 1986 vide Section 12, for causing deficiency by the Opponent in service for non-settlement of provident fund dues, the brief facts of the case are narrated as follows:- That the Complainant was employed with M/s. Subhas Silk Mills Limited at Sakinaka, Mumbai 400072 having provident facility which was deducted from his salary and the same was deposited in his PF A/c no. MH/162/4020. The Company has given him a break in service in the year 1997. The Complainant states that he is entitled to receive Rs.5,710/- towards provident fund and Rs.2373/- for EPfund totaling Rs. 8083/-. The said amount is to be credited to his Bank A/c no. 21333 with Abhudaya Co-operative Bank Ltd., Bail Bazar, Mumbai 400 070. The Complainant filed form no.19 on dt. 27/09/2005. The Complainant visited the Office of the Opponent several times as well as sent legal notice but in vain. Opponent vide their letter dt. 06/11/2008 stated that the PF claim of the Complainant settled in 1997-98. However the Complainant states that since he has not received his PF dues till date. Therefore Complainant sent legal notice to Opponent on 20/08/2007 hence cause of action is within the period of limitation and the Opponents office is situated at Thane, therefore this forum has jurisdiction to decide and .. 2 .. adjudicate and decide this complaint. The prayer of the Complainant is as follows:- 1. The Opponent to pay Rs.8,083/- alongwith 12% interest p.a. Rs.10,669/- 2. The Opponents to pay Rs. 50,000/- towards mental harassment. 3. Any other relief in favour of the Complainant.
2. The Forum issued notice to Opponent vide Exhibit no. 6. The Opponent filed vakalatnama vide Exhibit no. 7 and filed application vide Exhibit no. 8 for adjournment. The Opponent filed written statement vide Exhibit no. 9 The Complainant filed rejoinder vide Exhibit no.10 and affidavit on evidence vide Exhibit no. 11 and filed document vide Exhibit no.12. The Complainant filed written argument vide Exhibit no.13. The Opponent filed written argument vide Exhibit no. 14 alongwith legal citations. The contention of written statement and written argument of the Opponent are as follows:- The Opponent denied all the contention, statements, submissions, arguments made out in the complaint. The accumulated PF amounting of Rs.8083/-. accumulated in PF A/C no. MH/162/4020 was remitted to Complainants bank A/c no. 21333 in Abhudaya Co-op., Bank Ltd., Branch Bail Bazar, Mumbai 400 070 by A/c payee cheque. The PF dues settled in 1997-98 itself. The Opposite Party is a statutory and not profit making body and is always acting in favour of the employee members. The Complainant should have impleaded the concerned bank as a necessary party. The Complaint is 8-9 year late hence barred by law of limitation. The Complainant has filed the case with malafide intention to get enriched once again by abusing the process of law. The complaint is frivolous and vexatious and hence as per section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 the same should be dismissed with exemplary cost. The Complainant is not entitled for any relief as per prayer and the same should be dismissed.
3. We have perused the contents of the complaint rejoinder, affidavit, documents, written argument of the Complainant and also written statement, written argument, affidavit and legal citations filed on record by the .. 3 .. Opponents. In this complaint the only question arises for our consideration which is as follows:- A) whether the Complainant has proved any deficiency in service committed by the Opponent towards the Complainant?Answer – Yes, for the following reasons:- R E A S O N S A) Explanation :- The Complainant was employed in M/s. Subhas Silk Mills Ltd., Sakinaka, Mumbai 400 072 who was having PF facility bearing PF A/c no. MH/162/4020. The said company had given him break in 1997. His PF dues of Rs.5,710/- and EPF of Rs. 2,373/- totaling Rs.8083/- should have been credited into his Bank A/c no. 21333 with Abhudaya Co-op., Bank Ltd., Bail Bazar, Mumbai 400 070 as per his complaint. The Opponent is a statutory non-profit making body who has settled the PF of the Complainant in 1997-98 only but they are not in a position to give any details to that effect as they only preserve the documents only for 3 years and 1 year respectively. This matter is as old as 8 to 9 years. And the old record is not available with the Opponent. It is pertinent to note that the Complainant has given the Bank address as per complaint which is as under:- The Abhudaya Co-op., Bank Ltd., Bail Bazar, Mumbai 400070 SB A/c. no. 21333. Whereas the Complainant has attached form no. 19 alongwith the complaint wherein the Bank details are given as under:- UTI Bank Royal Accord, IV Main Road, Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (W) Mumbai 400053. SB A/c no. 020010100125550 The Complainant has produced the original pass book of the Abhudaya Co-op., Bank wherein there is no credit entry of Rs. 5,710/- as PF and Rs. 2,373 as EPF in the passbook. That means the Opponent did not remit any amount into the SB A/c of the Complainant with Abhudaya Co-op Bank Ltd., However there may be possibility that the Opponents may have deposited the amount in UTI Bank as per contra. The Opponent being the statutory and non-profit .. 4 .. making body and also the custodian of the employee's provident fund should not shirk from their responsibility. The provident fund amount is meant for the subsistence and survival of the Complainant and his family members. Non-remittance of the PF amount and non compliance of the queries of the Complainant amounts negligence and deficiency in service. It also amounts to denial of natural justice to the Complainant. With this view we pass the following order:- ORDER 1. Complaint no. 391/2008 is partly allowed. 2. The Opponent is directed to scrutinize and satisfy the accounts of PF dues of the Complainant with both the banks with their statement of account forthwith or else they should deposit Rs.8,083/- towards PF dues into SB A/c of the Complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing this complaint.
3. The Opponent to follow this order within 30 days from the receipt of this order or else 3% penal interest p.a shall be payable from passing of this order. 4. Certified copies be furnished to the parties free of charge.
5. The Complainant is directed to collect 2 set of files form the office, or else the Forum is not responsible.
THANE DATE : 30/10/2009
(MR. P. N. SHIRSAT)(SAU. SHASHIKALA S. PATIL) MEMBER PRESIDENT judgments from 02-06-2008 on Cdrf2\Shirsat Sir
| 
