Punjab

Sangrur

CC/445/2018

Deepak Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ms.Ashna Rani - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

10 Jun 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                            

 

                                                                        Complaint No. 445

Instituted on:   23.10.2018

                                                                        Decided on:     10.06.2019 

 

Deepak Kumar, Advocate, Enrolment Number R/1290/2016, R/O #480, Near Ram Mandir, Sangrur-148001, Punjab, India Mobile: 98554-55457.

 

                                                        …. Complainant.       

                                         Versus

 

1.     Ms. Ashna Rani (Ashna Vashisht), the then Postal Assistant, Operating at Saving Bank Counter, Head Post Office, Near Clock Tower, Sangrur.

2.     Assistant Post master ( C ) Head Post Office, Main Branch, Near Clock Tower, Sangrur.

3.     Chief Postmaster General, Punjab Circle, Chandigarh-160017.

             ….Opposite parties

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:      In person                 

FOR OPP. PARTIES           :      Shri S.S. Randhawa, Adv. for Ops.

 

Quorum

         

                   Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

                    Manisha, Member

ORDER:   

 

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

 

1.               Shri Deepak Kumar, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant visited the branch of OP No.1&2 controlled and operated by OP.no.3 to open his saving account. The complainant fulfilled all the formalities and submitted all the required documents as prescribe in the “Form” and also handed over the cash of Rs.100/- for opening of the account with OP number 1 and also enclosed the copy of the Adhaar Card as Address proof of identity proof along with the post office saving bank account performa fully filled as per required information therein. The OPs number 1&2 with his signature and seal returned the Form with the comments on it. Further the complainant has alleged that the objection raised by the Ops number 1&2 is totally illegal, violation of Govt. Rules, Notification and also against the notifications, Rules and Regulations and as per prescriptions written on the Performa and also issued by their Regional Office. The complainant further averred that OP number 1 even did not raise illegal objection and also threatened the complainant and harass the complainant mentally, physically by saying that the complainant is mad and habitual in doing these types of complaints and they have experience in treating such type of complaints and even on any attempts they will not solve issue of complainant in any way.  The complainant has demanded Rs.18,000/- as compensation for harassment from Ops and any other relief which this Forum may deem fit and proper. OP may also be directed to remove the illegal raised objection on the prescribe form and to open the account of the complainant.

 

2.               In reply filed by the OPs, preliminary objections are taken up that present complaint is not maintainable as the complainant is not a consumer of the Ops, that the complainant has no cause of action and locus standi to file the complaint under CPA, that the complainant has concealed and suppressed the material facts from this Forum and has tried to mislead the Forum. On merits, it is admitted that on 30.6.2018 the complainant had visited the office of OP number 2 for opening of the saving bank account and the Op number 1 was also present at that time and the OP number 1 asked the complainant to complete all the formalities required to open the account and to submit two photographs and KYC document, but the complainant submitted only one copy of aadhar card as his identity proof  and after scrutinizing the papers for opening of saving bank account, the Ops number 1 and 2 had asked the complainant to submit his another ID proof i.e. date of birth, as it was not matching with the account opening form, but the complainant refused to do so.  Further it is averred that the counter PA had requested the complainant again and again to supply the required documents, but he failed to do so.  However, any deficiency in service on the part of the Ops has been denied. 

 

3.               The learned counsel for the complainant has produced on record Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OPs has produced Ex.OP/1 to Ex.OP/3 and closed evidence.

 

4.               We have carefully perused the complaint and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties.

 

5.               It is admitted fact between the parties that on 30.06.2018 the complainant visited the Office of OPs number 1&2 to open the saving account. The complainant in his complaint has submitted that he handed over the cash amount of Rs.100/- to opening the account with the OP number 1, but could not place on record any document showing that he got deposited the same amount with the Ops number 1&2. In view of this, since the complainant has not deposited any amount with the Ops number 1&2, the complainant can not be considered as the consumer under section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. As such, the complaint of the complainant is dismissed with no order to cost. Copy be this order be supplied to the party free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                          Pronounced.

                          June 10, 2019.

                                            

                                                (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                   Presiding Member

 

 

 

 

                                                        (Manisha)

                                                          Member