Before The District Forum:Kurnoo

Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President

And

Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member

Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., Member

 Monday the 29^th day of December, 2003

C.D.No.58/2002

K.AnuRadha,

W/o Vijaya Bhaskar,

H.No.17/40,

Park Road,Nandyal,

Kurnool Dist.                                      . . . Complainant represented by his

                                                                  Counsel Sri B.Rama Subba Reddy

-Vs-

1. The Post Master,

Head Post office,

Kurnool.

2. The Superintendent

Of post officers,

Nandyal Division,

Nandyal,Kurnool Dist.           . . . Opposite parties 1 &2 represented

                                                     By his counsel Sri M.D.V.Jogaiah Sarma

O R D E R

(As per Smt C.Preethi, Member)

1.       This CD complaint of the complainant is filed under section 12 of C.P.Act. 1986 seeking a direction on the opposite party to pay the monthly interest fallen due from April, 2000/- under MIS Account bearing No.772734 for RS.30, 000/- dt 13.10.1997 and to declare notices dt 30.7.2001 and another notice dated nil issued by opposite party as arbitrary and illegal, RS.2, 000/- for mental agony, RS.1,000/- as costs and any such other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.

2.       The brief facts of the complaint of the complainant are that the complainant opened accounts under Monthly Income Scheme at Nandyal Post Office, Kurnool District (1) Account No.772037 dated 16.6.1994 for RS.24, 000/- (2) Account No.772060 dated 27.7.1994 for RS.24,000/- (3) Account No.772157 dated 11.11.1994 for RS.30,000/- (4) Account No.772460 dated 5.8.1996 for RS.24,000/- (5) Account No.772566 dated 13.3.1997 for RS.30,000/- (6) Account No.772613 dt 19.5.1997 RS.30,000/- (7) Account No.772689 dt 14.8.1997 for RS.30,000/- (8) Account No.772734 dated 13.11.1997 for RS.30,000/-. As per the scheme the interest is paid every month, so for, the last 8 deposit is concerned interest was paid up to March 2000, and interest from April, 2000 was not paid and post poned on some pretext or other. On 30.7.2001 the complainant received a notice of the opposite party No.1 stating that the last deposit i.e 8^th deposit is irregular one as it has exceeded the prescribed limit under Monthly Income Scheme.  So the opposite party No.1 requested the complainant to close her last i.e 8 th deposit and ordered his authorities to recover the interest along with agents commission from the complainant.  Thereafter that the complainant got issued a legal notice dt 30.8.2001 denying the allegations of the opposite parties.  After receiving the said legal notice the opposite parties replied.  The complainant further submits that the opposite parties never informed about the prescribed limited under monthly Income scheme and also never raised any objection for opening of the said last account.  Having permitting the complainant to open her last account and paid monthly interest up to March,2000 now all of a sudden cannot say that the last account is irregular.

3.       The conduct of opposite parties in issuing notices and not paying interest that has fallen due from April 2000 under the last account is amounting to deficiency of service.

4.       The complainant in support of her case relies on the following documents Viz (1) notice of opposite party No.1 dt 30.7.2001 (2) office copy of legal notice of complainant to opposite party No.1 dated 30.8.2001(3) postal acknowledgement for Ex A.2 and (4) reply notice of opposite party No.2 to Ex A.2.  The complainant also filed her sworn affidavit in reiteration of her complaint averments as evidence and the above documents are marked as Ex A.1 to Ex A.4 for their appreciation in this case.

5.       In pursuance of the notice of this Forum of this case the opposite party appeared through their standing counsel and filed its written version (objection statement) denying the averments made in the complaint except specifically admitted there in and the complaint is put to strict proof. Even though it admits the complainant opening 8 Monthly Income accounts on different dates but as per rules of Monthly Income Scheme which is a socio-economic scheme intended for benefit of retiring employees, the maximum prescribed limit that could be deposited by any individual deposit in all the accounts put together is RS.2, 04, 000/-.  In fact the complainant who was aware that she cannot deposit more than RS.2, 04, 000/- in her individual name and who has given an undertaking on early occasion of opening a new account to that effect that she would abide by the rules but intentionally and knowingly violated the rules. Thus immediately after noticing the violation of rules by the complainant the opposite party issued the said notice dt 30.7.2001 and requested the complainant to close the last account, which was opened in violation of rules, the opposite parties were compelled to collect the interest paid over the said deposit till then, while refunding the said deposit amount.  Thus there is no deficiency of service on part of the opposite parties and prays for the dismissal of complaint.

6.       The opposite party in support of their case relies on (1) attested xerox copy of application of the complainant for opening account No.772734 and (2) attested copy of Pass Book and also filed attested copy of months Income rules 1987, the above documents are marked as Ex A.1 and A.2 for their appreciation in this case. The opposite party No.2 filed his sworn affidavit in support of his case as evidence.

7.       Hence the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitled to?:-

8.       It is the case of the complainant that she opened 8 MIS accounts with opposite parties and was drawing monthly periodical interest on her 8 MIS accounts regularly.  For the first 7 accounts the complainant received interest but for the last 8^th account  i.e Account No.773724 interest was paid till March, 2000 only.  The opposite party No.1 later issued a notice dt 30.7.2001 requesting the complainant to close her last 8^th account as it is irregular, as it exceeds the prescribed limit of RS.2,04,000/-  all accounts put together and there after the opposite parties deducted the interest  already paid  on the last account on the pretext the complainant is not entitled to the interest as the last account opened exceeding the limits prescribed and closed the account after deducting already paid interest.

9. In this case the complainant is seeking a direction on the opposite party to pay monthly interest due from April, 2000 under the last 8^th  account, i.e  Account No.772734  but  the complainant is not seeking a direction on the opposite party to refund the interest amount collected from the complainant on the said last account, which was already deducted from the last account of the complainant.  Thereafter the opposite parties closing the last account of the complainant and paid the residuary balance amount to the complainant.  The complainant seeking a relief on the opposite party to pay monthly interest that has fallen due from April, 2000 under last 8^th account of the complainant which doesn’t arise at all as already the account is closed and paid the residuary balance amount to the complainant.  The complainant also seeks a direction to declare the notices issued by opposite party as illegal and arbitrary which doesn’t come within the purview of C.P.Act, 1986. 

10.           To sum up the above discussions the complainant utterly failed to conclusively establish holding the opposite party for the deficiency of service and his entitleness to the reliefs sought. Hence there is absolutely no material on record to support the alleged relief prayed by the complainant in his complaint.  For want of substantiating material in support of complainants allegations and for want of proper cause of action on the opposite parties.  The complaint is dismissed and complainant is not remaining entitled to seek only reliefs sought.

11.     Therefore, in the result the complaint is dismissed for want of merit and force.

Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the Dictated corrected by us, pronounced in the Open Court, This the 29^th day of December,2003

                                             PRESIDENT

          MEMBER                                                                                  MEMBER

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For the complainant:- Nil                                    For the opposite parties:-Nil

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

Ex.A1          Letter dated 30.07.2000 addressed by Postmaster, Nandyal to the complainant (Notice).

Ex.A2          Office copy of Reply Notice dated 30.08.2001 given by complainant’s counsel to the Postmaster, Head Post Office, Nandyal.

Ex.A3          Postal Acknowledgement for Ex.A2.

Ex.A4          Reply Notice of opposite party No.2 given to the complainants counsel.

List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-

Ex.B1          Attested copy Application of the complainant for opening account No.772734.

Ex.B2          Attested copy of Pass Book.

                                        PRESIDENT

          MEMBER                                                                                  MEMBER