State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Chief Post Master General (Pli ... vs C.Govindasamy & Anr on 2 April, 2008
BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI Present : Hon'ble Thiru Justice K.SAMPATH PRESIDENT Thiru Pon. GUNASEKARAN, B.A., B.L., MEMBER-I F.A. No. 416/2004 [ Against OP No.7/2001 on the file of the DCDRF, Srivilliputhur] DATED THIS THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL, 2008 The Chief Post Master General :: Appellant / 1st Opp.party (PLI Section), Tamil Nadu Circle, rep. by Adv. CGSC Chennai : 600 002. Mr.M.Venkateswaran Vs. 1. C.Govindasamy :: 1st Respdt/Complainant S/o Chinna Karuppiah 31A, Bharathiyar Street, Kil Avarampatty Rajapalayam Town. 2. Asst. Manager :: 2nd Respdt/2nd Opp.party Accounts Audit Section rep. by Adv. Division 1 Mr.S.Balaji State Express Transport Corporation, Chennai : 600 002. O R D E R
K.SAMPATH J . { Open Court} The 1st opposite party in OP No.6/2001 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Srivilliputhur, is the appellant herein.
The case of the complainant was as follows :- He had taken postal life insurance with the 1st opposite party, the monthly premium being Rs.96/-. The value of the policy was Rs.10,000/- the maturity of which was on the complainant attaining the age of 50 years. The policy matured in March 2000 and a claim was preferred. There were non-credits which were advised to be reconciled vide the 1st opposite partys letters dated 4/2/2000 and 17/8/2000. The missing credits were for the months of 7/94, 2/95, 9/96, 7/97, 9/97 and 1/98. According to the complainant the amounts were recovered by his employer viz., the 2nd opposite party but were not remitted by the employer to the 1st opposite party and the complainant should not suffer on that score. The 1st opposite party took the stand that the insured was personally responsible for ensuring the prompt credit of monthly premia and in the event of non-credit by the 2nd opposite party the complainant had to arrange to credit the same in time in cash into the Post Office. The 1st opposite party therefore deducted a sum of Rs.812/- from the amount payable and issued sanction for the balance. The complainant refused to collect the amount alleging that the deduction was not warranted and it was outside the scope of the policy.
2. The case of the 2nd opposite party was that for the disputed credits the 2nd opposite party had made payment to the 1st opposite party and there was no default on the part of the 2nd opposite party.
3. Before the District Forum, on the side of the complainant Exs.A-1 to A-7 were marked while on the side of the 1st opposite party Exs.B-1 to B-7 and on behalf of the 2nd opposite party Ex.B-8 were marked.
4. The District Forum accepted the case of the complainant and held that the 1st opposite party was justified in deducting Rs.812/- from the amount payable to the complainant and by order dated 21/12/2002 allowed the complaint and directed the 1st opposite party to pay the entire amount due under the policy together with a sum of Rs.2,000/- as compensation for mental agony. It is as against that the present appeal has been filed.
5. We have heard counsel and gone through the materials on record. We are satisfied that the District Forum had rightly allowed the complaint and no exception could be taken to it. So far as the 2nd opposite party was concerned, he had acted as an agent of the 1st opposite party. It is now settled law that the principal would be answerable to any deficiency in service on the part of the agent. In the instant case, so far as the 2nd opposite party was concerned, his definite stand was that all the instalments had been duly sent to the 1st opposite party. Even assuming that such payments had not been made and there was default, the complainant could not be penalised. In his pay-slips the amount payable to the 1st opposite party had been shown and had been deducted. In such a situation, the District Forum rightly allowed the complaint. The appeal, therefore, fails and the same is dismissed.
Pon.GUNASEKARAN K.SAMPATH MEMBER-I PRESIDENT INDEX : YES / NO