BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Complaint Case no. 01 of 2022
Date of Institution: 03.01.2022
Date of Decision: 19.05.2023.
Deepak kumar son of Sh. Jagan Nath, resident of Bhagwan Dass and Company, Dabwali Road, Sirsa- 125055, Tehsil and District Sirsa (Haryana).
………Complainant.
Versus
1. Post Master, Head Post Office, Sirsa 125055 (Haryana)
2. Superintendent, Head Post Office, Hisar Division, Hisar- 125001 (Haryana).
3. Indian Postal Department, through its Chief Postmaster General, Haryana Circle, Ambala Cantt- 133001 (Haryana).
……… Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR………. PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………..MEMBER
Present: Sh. Anil Bansal, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Naveen Adlakha, Post Master on behalf of opposite parties.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as OPs).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that complainant got opened a five years recurring deposit account bearing No. 3070473170 of Rs.2000/- per month in Head Post Office, Sirsa (Op no.1) on 29.07.2015 through post office agent namely Smt. Poonam Rani wife of Sh. Ravinder Kumar. This RD account was to be matured on 29.07.2020 after completion of 60 months period and maturity amount of Rs.1,49,302/- was to be paid by op no.1 with interest @8.40% per annum (applicable at the time of opening of RD account) on 29.07.2020 to the complainant. It is further averred that complainant paid all 60 monthly installments of Rs.2000/- each w.e.f. 29.07.2015 and thus complainant was entitled to get full maturity amount of Rs.1,49,302/- on 29.07.2020. That in the morning session of 27.07.2020, complainant went to the office of op no.1 alongwith his brother Anil Kumar and they met there with Sh. Sunil Kumar, the dealing hand/ Clerk of RD accounts and showed his RD account pass book to him and told him that his RD account is to mature on 29.07.2020. Then, the above named dealing clerk told complainant that he will get his due maturity amount on 29.07.2020, however, he asked complainant to complete formalities of filling of withdrawal form on 27.07.2020 itself to make the process easy for Maturity as it shall take atleast two/ three days time and also asked him that he will get the cheque of his full maturity amount on 29.07.2020. That believing upon the version of Sh. Sunil Kumar concerned Clerk, the form of withdrawal was only signed by complainant in order to get the maturity in time on 29.07.2020, so said form was got filled up and identified by Ravinder Kumar husband of above named agent and original RD passbook was also handed over to said Clerk who asked him that he may collect his maturity amount cheque on 29.07.2020.
3. It is further averred that in the evening session of 27.07.2020, complainant received a message from op no.1 that his RD maturity cheque is ready and he may collect it. Accordingly, complainant went to the office of op no.1 on the same day to collect cheque of maturity value of his RD account. The dealing hand of RD Sh. Sunil Kumar handed over the cheque no. 129309 dated 27.07.2020 amounting to Rs.1,31,060/- to the complainant regarding maturity value of his RD account, but complainant was astonished to see that cheque because maturity value should have been of Rs.1,49,302/- instead of Rs.1,31,060/-, hence cheque was issued of less amount of Rs.18,242/- which was payable on 29.07.2020. This loss of Rs.18,242/- suffered to complainant is admitted by op no.1 in writing in its letter sent to the complainant on 30.07.2020. It is further averred that complainant immediately returned the above mentioned cheque in original to dealing hand Sh. Sunil Kumar and requested him to issue the cheque with correct maturity value of Rs.1,49,302/- but he misbehaved with him and showed his arrogant attitude as well. That complainant never given any application to get the amount of RD before the date of maturity as he has sufficient means and was not in urgent need of money for any purpose. No such consent was ever given by complainant to get the amount before maturity date. That otherwise too, no sane person shall get maturity before date, if there is loss of around Rs.18,000/- in two days. It is further averred that as per post office rules, the dealing hand never shown the Trial Closure Printed Report and payable amount of RD account before closure of complainant’s account and it is gross violation of rules and sheer negligence in performing official duties by dealing hand and concerned Post Master of op no.1. That complainant sent a detailed complaint dated 29.10.2020 to the ops but the higher authorities did not take any action in the matter rather complainant was shocked to receive letter no.SB/Comp/HO/RD/2020-21 dated 16/24.09.2021 from op no.2, in which the enquiry report was held Okay in favour of department without mentioning any reason and thus so called cheque made by op no.1 was found correct. It is further averred that it is totally biased findings by op no.2 and op no.2 has unnecessarily saved the defaulting official Sunil Kumar and Post Master op no.1 who have worked with sheer negligence and caused huge loss of money to complainant without his fault. That above original cheque of Rs.1,31,060/- is still lying with op no.1 for the reason best known to op no.1 and till date no payment has been made to complainant with correct maturity amount and further applicable interest till date. It is further averred that previously also, such like similar negligence of less calculation was seen in RD account of Smt. Bimla Devi wife of Indraj Singh which was later on resolved by giving her cheque of correct amount of maturity value of her RD account. That complainant sent legal notice to the ops on 14.10.2021 but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
4. On notice, ops appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections regarding cause of action, maintainability and that complaint is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties. On merits, it is submitted that date of closure of above said account is 27.07.2020 and amount payable was Rs.1,31,060/-. That at the time of opening of account, the complainant agreed to abide by the rules of the RD scheme by signing the account opening form and other relevant undertakings. As per record, the date of maturity of the account was 29.07.2020 but the account was closed on 27.07.2020 at the request and insistence of the complainant. The complainant was entitled for the full maturity amount only on or after 29.07.2020. It is further submitted that it is admitted that complainant visited to the post office to close his account on 27.07.2020. As per POSB (CBS) Manual rule 81, RD accounts can be closed without furnishing any reason after completion of three years from the date of opening of the account. In case the RD account is closed after completion of three years but before the date of maturity, simple interest on the deposits is payable at the rate applicable to the savings account as applicable from time to time. Thus the RD account is treated as saving account in premature closure case and the same has been done in the instant case. It is further submitted that complainant submitted the requisite documents for closure of account on the date 27.07.2020 and the counter assistant closed the account on the very same day as per departmental rules. In fact complainant agreed to close the account pre-maturely on 27.07.2020 by signing the closure form and accepted and the payment amount on the account closure form. It is further submitted that complainant submitted the requisite documents for closure of account on 27.07.2020 and received the cheque No.129309 of amount of Rs.1,31,060/- with dated signature on warrant side. The counter assistant and APM (Assistant Post Master) closed the account as per departmental rules. The complainant himself had accepted the closure amount of Rs.1,31,060/- by signing the closure form. The claim that he should be given full maturity amount is his afterthought once he got the account closed prematurely and the answering op cannot be held responsible for any fault on the part of the complainant. It is further submitted that complainant initially accepted the closure amount through account payee cheque but after two days he returned the same with the answering ops insisting that he should be given cheque of amount with full maturity amount which actually is not admissible under the rules. The account was closed at the insistence of complainant and he not only signed his application on 27.07.2020 but also accepted the amount admissible at the time of closure. That trial closure amount was shown to the complainant and he agreed to receive the amount of Rs.1,31,060/- by signing the account closure form on 27.07.2020. That complainant made complaints and during department enquiry, it was found that there was no fault of the dealing assistant and the APM as the complainant himself voluntarily insisted to close the account and the officials acted as per rules of the department. The complainant was intimated about the department enquiry that the officials were not at fault and acted as per rules of the department. The complainant is at liberty to receive the amount for which he was issued the account payee cheque. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
5. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C12.
6. On the other hand, ops have tendered affidavit of Sh. Sanjay Kumar Superintendent as Ex.R1.
7. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and Sh. Naveen Adlakha, Post Master on behalf of ops and have perused the case file carefully.
8. There is no dispute of the fact between the parties that complainant got opened a five years recurring deposit account (RD account) bearing No. 3070473170 with the op no.1 and deposited monthly installments of Rs.2000/- each with the op no.1 from 29.07.2015. The installments of Rs.2000/- each was deposited by the complainant for 60 months and said plan was to be matured on 29.07.2020 and on maturity on 29.07.2020, the complainant was entitled to receive the maturity amount of Rs.1,49,302/- from op no.1. However, on 27.07.2020 i.e. two days prior to the date of maturity, the cheque amount of Rs.1,31,060/- i.e. for less amount of Rs.18,242/- was issued to the complainant by the official of the ops. According to the complainant, form of withdrawal was only signed by complainant in order to get the maturity in time on 29.07.2020 at the asking of the official of the ops whereas according to the ops, the said account was closed prematurely by complainant himself on 27.07.2020 and accordingly cheque amount of Rs.1,31,060/- was given to the complainant as per their rules. However, the plea of the complainant found to be plausible and reasonable that only to get maturity amount of Rs.1,49,302/- on 29.07.2020 he completed the formalities i.e. signed the withdrawal form on 27.07.2020 on the asking of the official of the ops as two/ three days time is taken for granting maturity amount. It is true that except in case of most urgency no prudent man will apply for pre-mature withdrawal of his RD account just two days prior to the date of maturity when he has already been waiting for receiving maturity of the amount for five years after depositing the amount for five years and it is not understandable that for just two days he will suffer such a loss of the amount of Rs.18,242/- without any urgent need of the money. The ops have taken a plea that complainant himself agreed to close the RD account prematurely and as such the cheque amount of Rs.1,31,060/- was rightly issued to the complainant as per their rules. In this regard, ops have also placed on file withdrawal form as Annexure III which is signed by complainant and according to ops the application was signed by complainant on 25.07.2020 and cheque was prepared on 27.07.2020 but it appears that signatures of the complainant on an unfilled withdrawal form have been obtained and thereafter date as 25.07.2020 was mentioned in it and then cheque was prepared on 27.07.2020 two days prior to the date of maturity intentionally in order to cause loss to the complainant. The date as 25.07.2020 on the withdrawal form has also been mentioned to justify the withdrawal/ closure of the RD account prematurely by complainant himself. This is deficiency of services on the part of the op no.1 because they have not obtained any undertaking from the complainant that he wants to close his above said account prematurity and wants to get pre-maturity amount of his RD account and therefore, ops are liable to pay the maturity amount of Rs.1,49,302/- to the complainant alongwith interest as it is proved on record that cheque amount of Rs.1,31,060/- was returned back by the complainant to the op no.1 as it was of less amount.
9. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay maturity amount of Rs.1,49,302/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of @6% per annum from the date of maturity i.e. 29.07.2020 till actual payment within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. We further direct the ops to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above stipulated period. The prime liability to pay the above said amounts to the complainant will be of op no.1. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member President,
Dated: 19.05.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
JK
