State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Regional Provident Commissioner, vs Smt.C. Ramany on 17 August, 2012
Daily Order
Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Vazhuthacaud,Thiruvananthapuram First Appeal No. A/12/317 (Arisen out of Order Dated 24/02/2012 in Case No. CC/07/327 of District Kollam) 1. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT COMMISSIONER SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,CHINNAKADA KOLLAM KERALA ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. CHELLAMMA &ANR KANIYAMVILAKATHU VEEDU,POTHENCODE TRIVANDRUM KERALA ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: Smt.A.RADHA PRESIDING MEMBER PRESENT: ORDER
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
APPEAL NO. 317/12
JUDGMENT DATED: 17.08.2012
PRESENT:
SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER
The Regional Provident Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, : APPELLANT Sub Regional Office, Chinnakkada, Kollam.
(By Adv. K.V. Karma Chandran) Vs
1. Chellamma Kaniyamvilakathu Veedu, (Died) Nanathukavu, Pothencode.
Additional Respondents
1. Smt.C. Ramany Kaniyamvilakathu Veedu, Near C.S.I Church, Nannattukavu, Pothencode P.O. : RESPONDENTS Pin - 695 584.
(By Adv. Narayan R., amicus curiae)
2. The Manager M/s Ganesh Cashew Company, Puthoor P.O., Kottarakkara.
Pin - 691 507.
JUDGMENT SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER Aggrieved by the order dated: 24.02.02 in CC No. 327/07 on the file of CDRF, Kollam, the opposite parties came up in this appeal.
The Forum below allowed the complaint in part and directed the 2nd opposite party to pay Rs.265/- as monthly pension from 03.07.1997 along with 9% interest and further directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
2. When this appeal came up for hearing the learned counsel for the appellant/opposite party submitted that the complainant died as on 26.12.2011 while the said complaint was pending for disposal before the CDRF, Kollam. The legal heirs were not impleaded in the party array after the death of the complainant. More over, the death of the complainant was not brought to the notice of the Forum below. The final hearing of the complaint was on 14.02.02 which was after the death of the complainant. The order passed on 24.02.2012 was in favour of the complainant who was a dead person which was a nullity in the order and the order of the Forum below is not sustainable.
3. The legal heir of the complainant Smt.C. Ramany, who is said to be the nominee and legal heir of the said Chellamma filed an application before the appellant for the Return of Capital on 02.03.2012. It is also pointed out that the complainant had opted for commutation of 1/3rd of pension and Return of Capital. It is not in dispute regarding the option filed by the complainant with the appellant. He also made it clear that the original complainant i.e. the pensioner was already in receipt of the pension amount as ordered by the Forum below till the date of commutation with an amount of Rs.265/- per month. The reduction was due to the option exercised by her for 1/3rd commutation and 10% towards Return of Capital. As it is based on the option exercised by the deceased complainant the legal heir of the complainant became eligible for the amount of Rs.17,700/- as Return of Capital. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the 2nd opposite party/appellant. It was highly necessary to implead the legal heir in the appeal and this Commission impleaded the legal heirs as respondent in place of the complainant/deceased. It is also submitted that the daughter of the deceased accepted the amount of Rs.17,700/- in March 2002. The counsel also prayed for remand of the case in order to implead the legal heirs for accepting the pension. In view of the impleading petition filed by the appellant to implead the legal heirs this Commission issued notice to the legal heir of the deceased complainant Smt. Chellamma.
4. On issuance of notice the 1st respondent/legal heir was present in person. As she was not in a position to argue her case, this Commission appointed Adv. Narayan R., as amicus curiae for the respondent. He submitted on behalf of the respondent that it is true that the original complainant Smt. Chellamma died as on 26.12.2011 and this matter was not brought to the notice of the Forum below as the legal heir was not aware of the case. Submitting that there is no dispute that the order is null and void being an order in the name of dead person he agreed for a remand of the case for proper corrections in the impugned order. Further he submitted that the 1st respondent/legal heir received the amount only in March 2012. It is also pointed out that the legal heir herself had submitted an application on 2.3.12 before the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner for the benefits of Smt. Chellamma to be credited to the personal account of the legal heir. This was accompanied by the letter dated 29.03.2012. The Commissioner sanctioned the amount under Return of Capital which was being credited through the SB account of the legal heir of the deceased complainant.
The counsel also submitted that the complainant retired from the service as on 31.12.1999 and the pension was sanctioned only on 27.05.2004. It took a pretty long time for disbursement of the pension for a very old woman for a meagre pension due to the deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. There is a delay in settling the matters on the part of the appellant. The Forum below rightly allowed the compensation and cost.
5. Heard both sides in detail. This Commission find that there is an inadvertent mistake occurred in the order of the Forum below in issuing the order in the name of dead person. As a result of it, the order became nullity and it is highly necessary to make appropriate correction in the light of the documents produced before this Commission and the Forum below is directed to make appropriate corrections in the order.
6. The death certificate and the documents produced before this Commission is to be forwarded along with this order. As there is delay in the decision of making the pension payment order and also no disbursement of the Return of Capital of the legal heirs so far, which was paid only on 02/03/2012 that too after the death of the complainant is an inordinate delay on the part of the appellant and we find deficiency in service on the part of the appellant.
In the result the appeal is allowed in part and remitted back to the Forum below for appropriate corrections.
The parties are to appear before the Forum below on 24.09.2012.
Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Lower Forum with the LCR.
A. RADHA : MEMBER
Da
[ Smt.A.RADHA] PRESIDING MEMBER