PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Vs. BABY DANIAL
LAWS(KERCDRC)-2010-7-8
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on July 30,2010

PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Appellant
VERSUS
Baby Danial Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Kollam in OP No. 222/2005 dated 4th September, 2008. The appellant is the opposite party. In short, the complainant who was a worker under the first opposite party retired from the factory on 31.12.2000 due to superannuation at the age of 58 years. The complainant was born in the year 1942 which is valid in documentary evidence. The complainant had entered into service on 1969 under the Karuna Cashew Factory having account No. KR1268/206. She joined in Employees Provident Fund on 1969. After the first opposite party became the owner of the cashew factory in the year 1991 when the complainant was employed her accountnumber has been changed. The Complainant's Provident Fund accumulation is not settled after she retired as KR 1268/1529. The second opposite party rejected the benefit of the pension on the plea that she had only a total service less than 10 years and she had attained 58 years on 1.4.1998. The complainant alleges that there is deficiency in service on the part of the second opposite party. The first opposite party remained absent and set ex parte.
(2.) THE second opposite party contended that the complainant who was an employ of the first opposite party joined the Employees Provident Fund, 1971 Scheme with effect from 1.4.1991 at the age of 51 years as per Form No. 9. The complainant acquired the aged of 58 years on 1,4,1998 and the eligible service comes below 10 years and therefore not eligible for pension. The second opposite party prays for dismissal of the complaint.
(3.) THE evidence adduced consisted of witness PW1 and Exts. P1 to P4, For the opposite parties DW1 examined and marked Exts. D1 and D2. The Forum below arising 2 issues mainly they are: 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? 2. Compensation and costs.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.