AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE Appellant is the opposite party-Special Officer, THE Thiruvidaimarudur Taluk Co-operative. Housing Society Ltd. against whom an award has been passed by the District Forum, Thanjavur. THE complainant Jayaraman is a member of the said Co-operative Society. He has applied to the Secretary of the said Society for sanction of a loan of Rs. 50,000/- for construction of a house. He submitted relevant documents for that purpose. His complaint is that the loan was not sanctioned despite repeated demands and reminders. On these grounds he had filed the complaint for directing the opposite party to sanction the said loan amount of Rs. 50,000/- and also for damages as mentioned in the complaint.
THE opposite party contended that the application with documents given by the complainant to the Secretary was forwarded to the Cooperative Housing Federation, Madras for sanction, and the sanction was accorded by the Federation on 13.3.95, and intimation of this was sent to the complainant on 16.3.95 to come and receive the loan amount, but the complainant did not turn up, but has filed the complaint before the District Forum on 21.3.95 with an ulterior motive/intention. As such there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The District Forum held that there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The District Forum in its order, directed the opposite party to release the loan amount sanctioned to the complainant forthwith. Besides this, it has further passed an order directing the Secretary of the Society to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and also costs of Rs. 1,000/- from out of his private funds. It is against this order the appeal has been filed.
Before us it is not disputed regarding the order directing the opposite party to pay the loan amount. But it is contended that the further order directing the Secretary of the Society to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and also costs of Rs. 1,000/- personally is illegal and it cannot be sustained. According to the opposite party-Special Officer, on receipt of the order from the Federation sanctioning the loan to the complainant, a letter dated 16.3.95 was sent to the complainant to come and receive the amount, but the complainant has not come forward. It is in disputed that the opposite party has sent another letter dated 20.3.95 again directing the complainant to take the money from the Society and that letter addressed to the complainant has also reached him on 22.3.95. It appears that the complaint has been filed on 21.3.95. It is mentioned in the order of the District Forum that the Forum told the complainant to go and receive the money from the Secretary, but he came back and told that the opposite party was not giving the amount whereupon the Forum asked the Counsel for the opposite party why the amount was not disbursed, and to that the Counsel told the Forum that since the higher authorities told not to disburse the amount since a case has been filed the amount could not be disbursed. In these circumstances, the Forum, besides ordering the opposite party to disburse the loan amount, has also passed an order as aforesaid directing the Secretary of the Society to pay to this complainant a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and also costs of Rs. 1,000/- from out of his own private funds. Now in the appeal this latter part of the order of the District Forum respecting the Secretary of the Society is challenged as illegal and unsustainable. We are clearly of the view that such an order cannot be sustained. It is not clear whether by saying "Secretary of the opposite party" the District Forum means the opposite party-Special Officer or any other person who is functioning as Secretary. If it is any other person then the order is liable to be summarily set aside as he is not before the Court and the order is against the principles of natural justice. But if the District Forum has meant the opposite party Special Officer, it appears to us that when the higher officials had told him not to disburse the amount since a complaint has been filed and on account of that the amount was not disbursed, it cannot be said that there was a wrong act on the part of the opposite party. Therefore, the opposite party-Special Officer cannot be directed to pay any amount to the complainant from out of his own funds. In these circumstances, the order of the District Forum directing the opposite party to pay the sanctioned loan amount of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant is confirmed and maintained, but rest of the order directing the Secretary to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and costs of Rs. 1,000/- is set aside. The Appeal is ordered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs in the appeal. Appeal ordered accordingly.