State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sujata Dhir vs Superintendent Of Post Office on 11 August, 2017
FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No.244 of 2017
Date of Institution : 03.04.2017
Order Reserved on: 10.08.2017
Date of Decision : 11.08.2017
1. Sujata Dhir aged about 56 years wife of Rajesh Kumar son of
Bhagwan Dass.
2. Rajesh Kumar aged about 57 years son of Bhagwan Dass,
both residents Rakhri Road, Near Shivala Mandir, Ferozepur
City Mobile No.88723-68006.
.....Appellants/complainants
Versus
1. Superintendent of Post/General Post Master, Head Post
Office, Ferozepur Division G.T Road, Ferozepur Cantt.
2. Union of India Ministry of Post Telegraphs, Central Secretariat,
New Delhi, through its Secretary.
.....Respondents/opposite parties
First Appeal against order dated
27.01.2017 passed by the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Ferozepur.
Quorum:-
Shri J. S. Klar, Presiding Judicial Member.
Smt. Surinder Pal Kaur, Member Present:-
For the appellants : Sh. Raman Goklaney, Advocate For the respondents : Sh. R.P. Singh, Advocate ............................................ J.S KLAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER :-
Challenge in this appeal by appellants is to order dated 27.01.2017 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Ferozepur (in short the 'District Forum'), partly allowing the complaint with a direction to appellants of this appeal to submit the claim of KVP's with the respondents of this appeal alongwith original KVP's First Appeal No.244 of 2017 2 and in the case of loss of the original instruments, appellants should follow the rules Under Regulation 43 of Post Office Savings Bank Manual-Volume II for issuance of duplicate instrument and also submit other documents which are required for the payment of the KVP's within fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of order and thereafter, the respondents of this appeal on receipt of documents from them will make the payment of KVPs within thirty days, failing which the appellants shall be entitled to initiate proceedings against respondents under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Respondents of this appeal are the opposite parties in the complaint before the District Forum and appellants of this appeal are complainants therein and they be referred as such herein after for the sake of convenience.
2. The complainants instituted complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the OPs on the averments that Smt. Om Wati mother-in-law of complainant No.1 and mother of complainant No.2 had purchased Kissan Vikas Patra, MIS and Term deposits from the opposite parties during her life time. It was further averred that above Om Wati died. During her life time, she executed a will in favour of complainants in the year 1991. There was a dispute between complainant No.2 and his brother namely Jiwan Lal Dhir regarding the property of Om Wati and her husband. The above named Jiwan Lal filed a civil suit for declaration before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Ferozepur about it. The court of Smt. Daljit Kaur, Civil Judge Junior Division, First Appeal No.244 of 2017 3 Ferozepur dismissed the suit of said Jiwan Lal, vide its judgment and decree dated 01.04.2011. It was further averred that above Jiwan Lal preferred an appeal against the order before the court of District Judge, Ferozepur and the same was dismissed by Additional District Judge Ferozepur Shri J.S. Marok, vide its order dated 09.09.2014. It was further averred that both the complainants are the nominees of above Om Wati in above said KVP, term deposits and MIS. During the pendency of the civil suit as well as civil appeal, the complainants approached OP no.1 many a time to make payment of the above said KVP's MIS and Term deposits to them and also completed all the formalities. But OP no.1 did not make the payment to them on the ground of pendency of civil suit between the legal heirs of Om Wati. After decision of the civil suit, they again approached OP no.1 and requested to make the payment of the KVP's, MIS and Term deposits alongwith agreed rate of interest to them. Thereafter, OPs sent the cheque to complainant Rajesh Kumar for an amount of Rs.1,38,338/- dated 30.07.2011 qua the MIS No.3700758 and 3700759 (amounting to Rs.42,000/- each). Complainant Rajesh Kumar further received an amount of Rs.80,480/- dated 30.07.2011 qua the Term Deposits No.3127837 for Rs.20,000/- and No.3128843 for Rs.50,000/-, through cheque. It was further averred that OPs also sent another cheque to complainant Sanjeeta Dhir for an amount of Rs.61,336/- dated 07.03.2015 qua the term deposit No.3130046 for Rs.40,000/- after the decision of the appeal. The OPs paid the above said amounts to First Appeal No.244 of 2017 4 the complainants after calculating the interest of saving bank i.e. 3.5 percent instead of agreed rate of interest on the basis of above said documents. It was further averred that the OPs till date did not pay the amount of KVP Nos.42CC907318, 42CC907319 and 42CC907320 dated 12.06.1996 and wrongly retained by them in their office. The complainants served a legal notice dated 24.03.2016 upon OPs for payment of KVPs, Term Deposits and MIS, but all in vain. The complainants alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant prayed that OPs be directed to pay Rs.30,000/- qua the payment of KVP Nos.42CC907318, 42CC907319 and 42CC907320 alongwith agreed rate of interest till the date of its maturity and further to pay interest @18% from the date of maturity till its realization; further to pay agreed rate of interest on the MIS Nos.3700758 and 3700759 from the date of its deposit till the date of its maturity and further interest @18% from the date of its maturity till its final realization qua the same; to pay agreed rate of interest on the Term deposit Nos.3127837, 3128843 and 3130046 from the date of its deposit till the date of its maturity and further interest @18% from the date of its maturity till its final realization; to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental harassment; and to pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed their joint written reply admitting the passing of the judgments by the court of Smt. Daljit Kaur and dismissal of the appeal in the court of the concerned First Appeal No.244 of 2017 5 Additional District Judge. The payments could not be made, as the rights of the parties were not determined in the civil litigation and the postal authorities were within their rights to withhold payments on above score. The original instruments were never impounded by the OPs, as alleged by the complainants. It was further averred that the payments made to complainants were correctly calculated. The Sub Postmaster, Ferozepur City sent letter dated 20.04.2015 to complainants and further sent reminders dated 05.05.2015, 11.06.2015 and 08.07.2015 to them to attend the office of OPs with original KVP Nos.42CC907318 to 42CC07320 for payment, but till date, they failed to produce the original KVP's in support of their claim for taking payment. The payments could only be made to them on production of original instruments and completion of other documentation. The OPs controverted the other averments of the complainants and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. The complainants tendered in evidence affidavits and documents Ex.C-1 to Ex. C-16 and closed the evidence. As against it, OPs tendered in evidence affidavit and documents Ex. OPs/1 to Ex. Ops/6 and closed the evidence. On conclusion of evidence and arguments, the District Forum partly allowed the complaint of the complainants, as referred to above. Aggrieved by above order, the complainants now appellants have directed this appeal against the same.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also examined the record of the case. Rajesh Kumar First Appeal No.244 of 2017 6 complainant no.2 tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 on the record in support of his case. Similarly, Sujata Dhir filed her affidavit Ex.C-2 on the record. Ex.C-3 is the copy of legal notice served upon OPs by complainants and Ex.C-4 and C-5 are photocopies of postal receipts thereof. Ex.C-6 is the reply to legal notice by OPs. Ex.C-7 is the letter from OPs to complainant no.2 regarding producing original KVPs. Ex.C-8 is the copy of letter from OPs to SPM Ferozepur regarding receiving the copy of judgment dated 09.09.2014. Ex.C-9 and C-10 are the copies of cheques of Rs.1,38,338/- and Rs.80,480/- in the name of Rajesh Kumar complainant no.2 issued by OPs. Ex.C-11 is the copy of cheque dated 07.03.2015 for an amount of Rs.61,336/- in the name of Sujata Dheer complainant no.1. Ex.C-12 is the copy of judgment of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Ferozepur, decided on 01.04.2011 on the record. Copy of judgment Ex.C-13 passed by Additional District Judge, Ferozepur in Civil appeal no.93 of 2012/2013, decided on 09.09.2014 on the record. Ex.C-14 to C-16 are the copies of KVPs in question. The complainants mainly relied upon the above referred evidence on the record. The OPs refuted this evidence by tendering evidence of Parkash Singh, Superintendent Post Offices Ex.OPs-1 on the record. This witness deposed that no assurance was given to complainants for payment of agreed rate of interest, as pleaded by complainants. He further stated that sub postmaster addressed letter dated 20.04.2015 to complainants, followed by reminders dated 05.05.2015, 11.06.2015 and 08.07.2015 for producing the original First Appeal No.244 of 2017 7 KVP Nos.42CC907318 to 42CC07320 for payment, but complainants failed to produce the original KVP's in support of their claim. Whereas there is no mention of KVPs number in the judgment of Civil Court dated 19.05.2011. Ex.OPs-2 is letter by Sub Postmaster to The Supdt. Post Offices regarding non availability of KVPs in question. Ex.OP-3 is letter to complainant no.2 asking him to submit the KVPs in question. Ex.OPs-5 is not legible. Ex.OPs-6 is copy of letter from OPs to complainant no.2 for encashment of above KVPs.
6. From hearing the considerable submissions of counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, we conclude that Smt. Om Wati mother-in-law of complainant no.2 and mother of complainant no.1 purchased Kisan Vikas Patra, term deposits and MIS from OPs. She died. There was a dispute in Civil Court with regard to validity of her will between complainants and Jiwan Lal regarding the property of Om Wati, who purchased the KVPs, MIS and term deposits from OPs. The complainants approached OP no.1 for payment of above said Kisan Vikas Patras during pendency of civil suit and completed the formalities. On account of pendency of civil suit, amounts were not released to them. The OPs sent the cheque to the complainant Rajesh Kumar for an amount of Rs.1,38,338/- dated 30.07.2011 regarding MIS No.3700758 and 3700759 amounting to Rs.42,000/- each and also sent the cheque to complainant Rajesh Kumar for an amount of Rs.80,480/- dated 30.07.2011 regarding Term Deposits No.3127837 for Rs.20,000/- and No.3128843 for Rs.50,000/- and First Appeal No.244 of 2017 8 they further sent another cheque to the complainant no.1 for an amount of Rs.61,336/- dated 07.03.2015 against term deposit No.3130046 for Rs.40,000/- after the decision of the appeal. So far, the payments of KVPs, as referred to above, have not been made to complainants by OPs. The submission of counsel for the OPs is that original Kisan Vikas Patra have not been produced by the complainants and without production of original KVPs, the payments cannot be released thereof to them.
7. The complainants already received the payments of MIS and term deposits. The controversy between the parties is now restricted to the point that complainants wanted agreed rate of interest, as promised by OPs even after their maturity period. On the other hand, OPs relied upon Post Office Savings Bank Manual (12) Post maturity Interest:- Post Maturity Interest:- Where repayment of the amount inclusive interest under Rule 15 has become due but not been made, interest shall be allowed on the amount (Principal plus interest) from the date of maturity to the date of repayment of the amount subject the following conditions, namely:- (i) The interest shall be simple and shall be calculated at the rate applicable to Savings Account the time of maturity of certificates. As per above Post Office Savings Bank Manual (12) Post maturity Interest, OPs paid the payments of MIS and term deposits to complainants rightly. We do not find any evidence on the record that OPs made any promise or gave any assurance to complainants to pay the agreed rate of interest even after maturity of MIS and term deposits. The First Appeal No.244 of 2017 9 delay was not on fault of OPs, but on account of the order of the Civil Court for which OPs have to pay simple interest only, as per above manual. The OPs cannot be attributed with any deficiency in service on account of delay which took place due to pendency of Civil lis.
8. On the point of payment of Kisan Vikas Patras, OPs wrote many reminders to complainants on different dates to produce the original KVPs and to receive the payments. Original KVPs have not been produced by the complainants to OPs and due to this reason, the payments were not released to them by OPs. Photocopies of KVPs in questions are Ex.C-14 to C-16 on the record proving their existence. In case of loss of original KVPs, the claim can be settled by following the Rules under Regulation 43 of Post Office Savings Bank Manual-Volume II for issuance of duplicate instrument.
9. As a corollary of our above discussion, we find that the District Forum has rightly not accepted the complaint of the complainants qua agreed rate of interest for MIS and term deposits in view of Post Office Savings Bank Manual (12) Post maturity Interest. The District Forum rightly gave direction to complainants to follow rule under Regulation 43 of Post Office Savings Bank Manual- Volume II for issuance of duplicate instruments by submitting other documents within 15 days period from the date of receipt of copy of order thereafter OPs on receipt of documents from the complainant, will make the payment of KVPs within thirty days. We do not find any illegality or perversity in the order of the District Forum under First Appeal No.244 of 2017 10 challenge in this appeal. The District Forum has rightly appreciated the controversy in proper perspective in our opinion. There is no merit in the appeal calling for any interference in the order of the District Forum. The appeal of the appellants is hereby dismissed.
10. Arguments in this appeal were heard on 10.08.2017 and the order was reserved. Certified copies of the order be communicated to the parties as per rules.
11. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.
(J. S. KLAR) PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER (SURINDER PAL KAUR) MEMBER August 11, 2017 MM