West Bengal

South 24 Parganas

CC/41/2015

1. Jagyashani Ganguly. - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. The Sub Post Master, Paschim Barisha Sub Post Office. - Opp.Party(s)

01 Jun 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPLUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , JUDGES’ COURT, ALIPORE KOLKATA-700 027

 

C.C. CASE NO. _41   OF ___2015____

 

DATE OF FILING : 22.1..2015     DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 01.06..2016

 

Present                         :   President       :   Udayan Mukhopadhyay

 

                                        Member(s)    :  Smt.  Sharmi Basu                      

 

COMPLAINANT                   :  Jagyashani Ganguly, 1, Rajani Banerjee Road, Barisha, Kolakta -8, Nilkanta Moni Ganguly, father’s name Upen Ganguly.

 

-VERSUS  -

 

O.P/O.Ps                                :     1. The Sub Post Master, Paschim Barisha Sub Post Office,DAskin para Road, Kolkata – 63.

                                                   2.     Shri H Nandy, Sr. Superintendent of Post Office, South Kolkata Division, Kolkata -29

                                                   3.     Chief post Master General, W.B Circle, P-36, C.R. Avenue, P.S. Thakurpukur, Kolkata – 12.

________________________________________________________________________

 

                                                            J  U  D  G  E  M  E  N  T

 

            Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member

             In a nutshell the case of the complainant is that the complainant has two MIS Accounts; one in the name of Jagya Shani Ganguly and Kalyani Ganguly  bearing nos. 108630 and other in the name of Jagya Shani Ganguly and Nilkanta Moni Ganguly bearing no.108631 amounting to Rs.34,000/- and Rs.45000/- and date of maturity was 26.09.2011, Mode of holding-Joint B , in the Paschim Barisha Sub Post Office and out of the interest amount of the said MIS accounts she somehow managed the family expenditure and medicine for her mother. Due to some disputes and difference arising  with the Sub Post Master of Paschim Barisha Sub Post Office, she decided to put the amounts of MIS to the Bank, for which after maturity date is over of the said MIS Accounts, she made an application to the Post Office for withdral of the said MIS amounts ,but the Sub Post Master of Paschim Barisha Sub Post Office though received the application ,did not give receipt of that application. On 30.09.2011 when she met the Sub Post Master and demanded  payment of the MIS amounts , the Post Master refused to make payment.  On 1.10.2011 when complainant Jagya Shani Ganguly and Nilkanta Moni Ganguly met the Sub  Post Master, they were informed that payment will be made to Nilkanta Moni Ganguly and Kalyani Ganguly at a time ,not separately. Complainant requested the Sub Post Master to make payment of one MIS in the name of Jagya Shani Ganguly and Nilkanta Moni Ganguly but the Sub Post Master refused to make payment of that MIS. After that several correspondences were made from 11.10.2011 to 31.7.2014 to the different level of Ministers, Post Offices, but the same yielded no result.             Hence, this case praying for compensation to the tune of Rs.78,611.85 and suitable cost etc.

            The O.P files written version contending inter alia that  there was no intentional laches or negligence nor any alleged deficiency in service made by these O.Ps. The positive case of the O.P is that Jagyashani Ganguly, co-holder of both the accounts attended Paschim Barisha Post Office on 1.10.2011 to take payment along with two MIS Pass Books and SB-7(A) (Account closure Form) But Sub-Postmaster , Paschim Barisha Post Office did not make the payment as the signatures of Kalyani Ganguly and Nilkanto Moni Ganguly were not present in closure vouchers of MIS accounts  and Sub-Postmaster requested Smt. Jagyashani Ganguly to arrange to put the signatures of Kalyani Ganguly and Nilkanto Moni Ganguly on corresponding closure Form (SB-7A) as they had already applied for payment vide their application dated 20.9.2011. But Smt. Jagyashani Ganguly,the complainant of this case, reused to do that and pressed to the O.P to give the payment under her signature. It is also case of the O.P that Nilkanto Moni Ganguly, other co-holder, refused to sign on the closure Form ,for which, O.P did not make the payment to avoid any future complication  and as the case was pending for prolonged time, the Assistant Superintendent of Post Office attended the house of Smt. Jagyashani Ganguly, the complainant, on 6.9.2014 in order to hand over the cheques being the principal plus interest upto date in the names of Smt. Jagyashani Ganguly, Nilkanto  Ganguly and Kalyani Ganguly  and both the accounts were closed on 6.9.2014 . O.P prays for dismissal of the case.       

Points for Decision

1. Whether the complainant is a Consumer or not.
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps or not.
3. Whether the complainant is eligible to get relief as prayed for partly or fully.

Decision with reasons

            All the points are taken together as they are interlinked. 

            In the instant case complainants deposited some amounts towards MIS and O.Ps paid monthly interest to them with respect to that amount. Therefore, complainants are consumers and O.Ps are service provider as per section 2(1)(d)(ii) and section 2(1)( o ) of the C.P Act, 1986.

            On several evaluation of the argument as advanced by the  complainant and the Ld.  Advocate of the O.Ps and also considering the entire materials of the complaint and written version of the parties including the documents it appears that admittedly complainants applied for receiving the matured amount of two MIS out of which one is in the name of both the complainants and another is in the name of one complainant and Kalyani Ganguly. But the aforesaid matured amounts have not been handed over to the complainants by theO.Ps. Though the O.Ps submitted that due to non-compliance of statutory formalities the O.Ps could not hand over the amount in question to the complainants, but they have miserably failed to produce any documents to establish that they have given specific direction regarding that effect. In this regard it is to be mentioned that O.Ps being one of the largest and oldest organization of Union of India , has to render services crores of people ,out of which some are literate and many are illiterate and most of the people are not aware about the particular official procedure. Therefore, we feel that it is the duty of every employee of postal department of India to render services with friendly attitude keeping in mind the aforesaid aspect.  But we feel that in this particular case O.Ps have not rendered their services in such a way and for that reason complainants have to run from pillar to post for receiving their legitimate claim. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that this inaction of the O.,Ps amounts to deficiency in service and for this reason complainants have to suffer immense financial loss and tremendous mental agony and harassment and for the aforesaid reason not only they are entitled for receiving the maturated amount of two MIS along with Bonus as per statute but also to be aptly compensated by the O.Ps.

            Thus all the points are discussed and the same are in favour of the complainant.

            Therefore, the case succeeds.

            Hence,

                                                                        Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs.5000/- as litigation cost  to be paid by the O.Ps jointly and/or severally within 30 days from the date of this order.

The O.Ps are also directed jointly and/or severally to pay Rs. 20,000/- towards compensation for suffering mental agony and harassment suffered by the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.

Be it mentioned here that in prayer (i)  there is no such prayer for refund of matured amount as it is already paid by O.Ps to the complainants.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Let a plain copy of Judgment be supplied to the parties free of cost as per rule.

 

                                    Member                                                                                   President                                 

 

Dictated and corrected by me

 

 

                        Member

 

 

 

 

The judgement in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,

 

                                                                        Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs.5000/- as litigation cost  to be paid by the O.Ps jointly and/or severally within 30 days from the date of this order.

The O.Ps are also directed jointly and/or severally to pay Rs. 20,000/- towards compensation for suffering mental agony and harassment suffered by the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.

Be it mentioned here that in prayer (i)  there is no such prayer for refund of matured amount as it is already paid by O.Ps to the complainants.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Let a plain copy of Judgment be supplied to the parties free of cost as per rule.

 

                                    Member                                                                                   President