By Smt.Padmini Sudheesh, President
The case is that the complainant is a pensioner who has been compulsorily retired from Health department on 4/5/88. The pension is disbursing from the 1st respondent bank and is drawing through 2nd respondent bank in Thrissur. He is not getting the pension in correct time regularly. He is 65 years of old having no other source of income. When the respondent delayed the disbursement of pension he could not attend the doctor and get medicines. He is suffering from many diseases. He is an unmarried person and nobody to look after. When the pension was delayed the complainant sent a notice to 1st respondent on 12/7/04 and subsequently sent a notice on 26/4/06. But the respondents are till now is not sending the pension in correct time. It is a deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.
2. The counter averments are that the pension account of complainant is with the 1st respondent and the account with 2nd respondent is a saving bank account. When 2nd respondent receives funds from the pension account with the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent will credit that in his savings bank account and he can withdraw the amount from his account. The pension paying branch is 1st respondent bank. No delay was caused on the part of respondents for disbursement of pension. The pension amount is regularly credited to the account of complainant. A copy of statement of account is produced. The 1st respondent is paying the pension promptly, by crediting it to the saving bank account of him There was no deficiency in service from these respondents. The statement of account would show that each and every month he had collected pension from 2nd respondent. After the withdrawal of amount there were huge balance in his savings account with 2nd respondent. . So it is not correct to say that due to delay in disbursement of pension he was unable to purchase medicines and to get proper medical care. Now core banking system had introduced and so remittance of amount to 2nd respondent is not at all warranted. He can withdraw amount from 1st respondent by presenting cheque to 2nd respondent. Hence dismiss.
3. Points for consideration are that :
1) Whether there was any deficiency in service from respondents ?
2) If so reliefs and costs?
4. Evidence consists of Exhibits P1 to P7 only.
5. The complaint is filed to get pension from the respondents regularly and without any delay. It is the case that the complainant is a pensioner and pension is disbursing from 1st respondent and it is drawn through 2nd respondent bank. The complaint is filed by alleging that he is not getting the pension in correct time regularly. So being an old man he is suffering from a lot. The respondents in their version stated that there is no delay at all to disburse the amount and the statement of accounts would show that 1st respondent is paying the pension promptly by crediting it to the saving account bank of the complainant. According to them there was no deficiency in service on their part.
6. The complainant produced exhibits P1 to P7 documents and no other evidence adduced by both. It is seen that in the complaint itself it is not stated the months during which pension was delayed. Exhibit P2 is a statement from 3/1/03 to9/7/04 from which it can be seen that there was no delay. The complainant also failed to prove the months of delay. In the lawyer notice also which is marked as Exhibits P1 and P5 the months not specified. There is insufficiency of evidence in the case and is liable to be dismissed.
7. At the time of hearing the case the counsel for complainant argued that the delay was in the month of 3/06, 4/06 and 5/06. But there is no document to show the delay. It is argued by the counsel for respondents that the complainant was an employee in Karnataka State and the 1st respondent should collect pension from Karnataka State concerned department and to disburse. The 2nd respondent is only the savings account bank of complainant. If any delay caused the complainant can collect the pension directly from the Karnataka State. No such attempt was seen done. Even if the respondents stated that the statement of account is filed no evidence is adduced by them. But as discussed above the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
8. In the result the complaint stands dismissed.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 29th day of July 2013.
