Punjab

StateCommission

A/11/1254

The Post Master General - Complainant(s)

Versus

Davinder Mohan - Opp.Party(s)

Namit Kumar

20 Feb 2015

ORDER

First Additional Bench

 

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB,

DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.

 

First Appeal No.1254 of 2011 

 

                                              Date of institution: 23.08.2011.

                                                            Date of Decision:   20.02.2015.

1. The Post Master General (Punjab Circle), Sector 17, Chandigarh.
2. The SSPO, Amritsar Division, Amritsar.
3. The Sub Post Master Mohan Nagar Post Office, Amritsar.
4. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Communication, New Delhi.

                                                      .….Appellants/ opposite parties.

 

                                      Versus

 

Sh. Davinder Mohan s/o Sh.Jai Chand, R/o # 74, Sunder Nagar, Gali No.3, Amritsar.

…..…Respondent/Complainant.

 

                                   AND

First Appeal No.1255 of 2011 

                                              Date of institution: 23.08.2011. 

                                                            Date of decision  : 20.02.2015.

1. The Post Master General (Punjab Circle), Sector 17, Chandigarh.
2. The SSPO, Amritsar Division, Amritsar.
3. The Sub Post Master Mohan Nagar Post Office, Amritsar.
4. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Communication, New Delhi.

                                                      .….Appellants/ opposite parties.

                                      Versus

Sh. Rajinder Shingari s/o Sh.Jai Chand, R/o # 74, Sunder Nagar, Gali No.3, Amritsar.

…..…Respondent/Complainant.

 

First Appeal against order dated 13.07.2011 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar.

Before:-

 

                Shri J.S.Klar, Presiding Judicial Member

                Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, Member.

 

Present:-

                For the appellants      :           Sh.R.P.Singh, Advocate

                For the respondent    :     Sh.Raj Karan Singh Verka,Adv.

 

Vinod Kumar Gupta, Member

                Since the points of common controversy and law are involved in the above referred two appeals, hence we propose to decide them by means of this common order, which shall be passed in First Appeal No.1254 of 2011. Two separate complaints were filed before the District Forum, one by Davinder Mohan Complainant in complaint No.1103 of 2009 decided on 13.07.2011 and second complaint No.1104 of 2009 was filed by Rajinder Shingari another complainant before the District Forum.   The District Forum Amritsar, accepted both the complaints of the complainants directing the opposite parties therein to make the payment of the maturity amount, as prayed for in the above referred two complaints by the complainants.  The OPs in the complaints filed two above referred separate appeals against each order of the District Forum, accepting the complaints of the complainants.  The above referred two appeals have been preferred before us by the opposite parties, now, appellants and First Appeal No.1254 of 2011 has been filed against Davinder Mohan Complainant of Complaint No.1103-09 and second appeal No.1255 of 2011 has been filed against Rajinder Shingari, the complainant of Complaint No.1104-09 therein.

2.             The brief facts of the complaint No.1103 of 2009 filed by the complainant Davinder Mohan are that on 17.08.2005, the complainant invested his money in TD accounts in the name of his minor daughter Baby Khushboo, vide accounts No.90840 and 90841 for Rs.30,000/- and Rs.32,000/- respectively for a period of two years on interest @ 8% p.a., being compoundable and the same was to mature on 17.8.2007, with Mohan Nagar Sub Post Office Amritsar.  Similarly, the complainant of complaint No.1104-09, Sh.Rajinder Shingari also opened his TD account No.90842 for Rs.10,000/- for a period of two years on interest at the rate of 8% p.a., being compoundable, with maturity date on 17.8.2007 with OP No.3.  On completion of formalities thereof, the passbook of the complainant was separately prepared and entries were recorded therein, which were duly stamped and signed and thereafter was handed over to the complainant.  The complainant was entitled to the payment alongwith 8% compoundable interest on the maturity date of account No.VIZ 17.8.2007 in complaint No.1103 of 2009.  Similarly, the passbook was issued to the complainant Rajinder Shingari of Complaint No.1104-09 by Sub-Post Master Mohan Nagar, Amritsar.  That on maturity of the above amounts, both the above complainants approached OPs No.3 to release the due amount of payment of the maturity to them.  OP No.3 refused to release the amount to the complainants.  The matter was taken with the authorities of the Post Office by the complainants about it separtaely aggrieved with the reason that Sub Post Master Mohan Nagar Amritsar gave letter dated 28.05.2009 to them, stating that OP No.1 has not given the sanction for disbursement and the letter was handed over to the complainants on 10.12.2009.  The reasons were not mentioned in letter dated 28.5.2009 by OP No.1 for not releasing the amounts of payments to both the above complainants.  The complainants approached the OPs many times for release of the amount of their TD accounts alongwith interest, but to no effect. The complainant Davinder Mohan of complaint No.1103-09 has also prayed that OPs be directed to make the payment of due maturity amount of TD account No.90840 & 90841 alongwith 8% compoundable interest from the date of deposit till actual payment, besides compensation of Rs.25,000/- and Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation.  The  complainant Rajinder Shingari filed complaint No.1104-09 against the OPs directing them to make payment of the due maturity amount with 8% compoundable interest, besides compensation of Rs.15,000/- and Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.  

3.             On notice, both the above referred complaints were contested by the OPs by filing their separate written reply to each of them.  It was denied by the OPs that the complainants are their consumers, as the OPs are not providing banking and other facilities.  It was further averred that the complainants have not come to the Post Office Mohan Nagar nor deposited their amounts in the above TD accounts.  It was further pleaded that if there was any dealing committed by Ravinder Kumar extra departmental packer Post Office Mohan Nagar Amritsar at his house, he misappropriated the amount, as he was not authorised to receive the money from the public on behalf of OPs.  That he is guilty of cheating and fraud with the complainants and entries in the passbook are not factually correct, as the above passbooks are not prepared and signed by the officer of Post Office concerned.  That the complainants should take the independent remedy at their own level against Ravinder Kumar extra departmental packer Post Office Mohan Nagar, Amritsar.  That the alleged transactions are fake and are not valid, as the passbook entries are not signed by any officers of the OPs.   The above complaints were contested on the above referred allegations by the OPs by filing their separate written replies thereto.  It was further pleaded by the OPs that public notice was displayed on 12.12.2005 in Post Office to check the accounts of investors and all account holders were requested to visit the Post office with their record, as fraud was committed by Ravinder Kumar.  The complainants had not visited the office of OPs despite public notice to this effect. The OPs prayed for dismissal of both the complaints by filing separate written replies thereto.

4.             In First Appeal No.1254 of 2011 -  The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, attested copy of passbook of account No.90840 issued by Post Office Mohan Nagar on 17.08.2005 Ex.C-2, attested copy of passbook  of account No.90841 issued by post office Mohan Nagar on 17.8.2005 Ex.C-3, copy of statement of Davinder Mohan recorded by Sh.Harjit singh SDI dated 16.2.2008  Ex.C-3, copy of statement of Davinder Mohan recorded by Sh.Harjit Singh SDI dated 16.2.2008 Ex.C-04, copy of application for non payment of TD account No.90840 and 90841 Ex.C-5, copy of letter issued by Department of Post Office Ex.C-6, copy of receipt of issuance of pass book of 2 year TD Account bearing No.90840 and 90841 Ex.C-7, affidavit of Sh.Rajinder Shingari Ex.CW2/A alongwith documents Ex.C-8 to C-11 and closed the evidence.  In First Appeal No.1255 of 2011, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, attested copy of passbook of Account No.90842 issued by Post Office Mohan Nagar on 17.8.2005 Ex.C-2, affidavit of Sh.Davinder Mohan Ex.CW2/A, copy of statement of Davinder Mohan recorded by Harjit Singh SOI Ex.C-3, copy of application for non-payment of TD account No.90842 Ex.C-4, copy of letter issued by Department of Post Office Ex.C-5, copy of receipt of issuance of pass book of 2 years TD account bearing No.90842 Ex.C-6 alongwith documents Ex.C-7 to C-10 and closed the evidence.  The opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.R.P.Sharma, Sr.Supdt of Post Office Ex.R-1, copy of letter dated 22.5.2009 Ex.R-2, attested copy of FIR Ex.R-3, attested copy of letter of enquiry Ex.R-4, attested copy of death certificate of Baljinder Singh Ex.R-5, attested copy of death certificate of Ravinder Sharma Ex.R-6, attested copy of enquiry report Ex.R-7 and closed the evidence.  On conclusion of evidence and arguments, the District Forum, accepted both the complaint with the directions to the Ops to make payment of maturity amount of TD Accounts to the complainants as per rules.  Complainants were also held entitled to interest @6% p.a. from the date of maturity of the amount till actual payment.   Dissatisfied with the order of District Forum in the above two complaints, the above referred two appeals have been preferred against the same by the opposite parties now appellants.

5.             We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone though the record of the case.

6.             The version of the complainants are that on 17.08.2005, they invested in TD account and deposited amount of Rs.30,000/-, Rs.32,000/- and Rs.10,000/-, vide account No.90840, 90841 and 90842 respectively for a period of two years at the compoundable interest of 8% p.a., which was to mature on 17.08.2007 from Mohan Nagar Sub Post Master, Amritsar.  On maturity thereof, they approached the Post Office officials for payment, but they refused to make the payment thereof to them.  It was pleaded by the appellants/opposite parties that the complainants never came to the Post Office as per record.  They had not invested the above said amounts, as alleged by them with the OPs.  The OPs plea is that if there was any alleged hanky-panky committed by Ravinder Kumar extra departmental packer Mohan Nagar Post Office Amritsar at his own house with the complainants, the complainants should proceed against him separately.  We find that the OPs took categorical stand that the amount was never deposited with them and the entries in the passbooks are not factually correct and are forged.   We find that the complicated questions of facts and law are involved in this case which cannot be decided in summary proceeding by consumer forum.  This is a case where detailed evidence entailing the examination, cross-examination of the witnesses including the expert witness of documents would be required to decide the case.  The matter with complex facts like the present cases cannot be decided in the summary proceedings in our view.  Our own State Commission had also held in Superintendent Post Offices Vs. Darshan Singh in Appeal No.468 of 1999  decided on 09.05.2000 that a detailed enquiry and ellaborate evidence has to be led by both parties to decide the case, which could not be done by the Consumer Fora in summary proceedings and hence, the parties were at liberty to seek the redressal of their grievances from the competent court.  We are further fortified in this regard by the view of our own State Commission in case "Superintendent General Post Office etc. Vs. Baldev Raj Tiwari etc." in First Appeal No.461 of 2006 decided on 10.04.2007 by leaving the complainant to approach the Civil Court for redressal of the grievances.  We further find support from law of Hon'ble National Commission laid down in "Smt.Aysha Vs. Superintedent of Post Office, Ludhiana" in Revision Petition No.2253 of 2004 that such type of dispute could not be decided in summary jurisdiction by the Consumer Fora and parties were at liberty to seek the redressal of their grievances from competent court.

7.             In view of our above discussions, we accept both First Appeal No.1254 of 2011 and First Appeal No.1255 of 2011 and by setting aside the impugned orders of the District Forum Amritsar, dated 13.7.2011 and resultantly, the complaint filed by Davinder Mohan, complainant of Complaint No.1103-09 and second complaint filed by Sh.Rajinder Shingari, complainant of complaint No.1104-09 stand dismissed.  The complainants are at liberty to seek their remedies from the competent Civil or Criminal Courts, whatever the case may be.

8.             In F.A.No.1254 of 2011 - The appellants/OPs have deposited an amount of Rs.25,000/- with this commission at the time of filing the appeal.  The amount of Rs.25,000/- with interest accrued, if any, be remitted by registry to the appellants/OPs by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days.

9.             In F.A.No.1255 of 2011 - The appellants/OPs have deposited an amount of Rs.7,200/- with this commission at the time of filing the appeal.  The amount of Rs.7,200/- with interest accrued, if any, be remitted by registry to the appellants/OPs by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days.

14.           The arguments in this appeal were heard on 12.02.2015 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.

15.           Copy of this order be placed in First Appeal No.1255 of 2011.

 

                                                                  (J.S.Klar)

                                                    Presiding Judicial Member

 

 

February 20, 2015                          (Vinod Kumar Gupta)

Lb/-                                                              Member