Haryana

Panchkula

CC/210/2019

DR.RAJESH BANSAL. - Complainant(s)

Versus

POST MASTER. - Opp.Party(s)

COMPLAINANT IN PERSON

16 Aug 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA.

 

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	210 of 2019
Date of Institution	:	08.04.2019
Date of Decision	:	16.08.2022

 

 

1.     Dr. Rajesh Bansal, House No.764, Sector-11, Panchkula.

2.     Mrs. Poonam Gupta w/o Dr. Rajesh Bansal, House No.764,        Sector-11, Panchkula.                                                                                                                                          ..….Complainants

Versus                                                                  

1. Post Master, Post Office, Sector-15, Panchkula.
2. Mrs. Sunita Singla, Post Office Agent, R/o H.No.48, Sector-10, Panchkula.
3. Head Post Master, Head Post Office Sangrur(Punjab)-148001

       

                                                                       ……Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019.

 

 

Before:              Sh. Satpal, President.

Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

Dr. Sushma Garg, Member.

 

For the Parties:    Sh.Aman Arora, Advocate for the complainant.

                         Sh.Saurabh Sharma, Advocate for the Ops No.1 & 3.

                         None for the OP No.2.

 

ORDER

(Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member)

1.             The brief facts of the present complaint as alleged are that in the month of March, 2016 the complainants have applied for opening of three TD accounts(Time deposit 1 year duration) in Post Office, Sector-15, Panchkula through Post Office Agent Mrs.Sunita Singla out of which two FD were in  his name and one account in his wife’s name i.e. Poonam Gupta for totaling amount of Rs.17,20,000/-  for which the cheques for the said amount were deposited by Mrs. Sunita Singla, the post office agent with the Postal Authorities at Post Office, Sector-15, Panchkula on 10.03.2016 and 19.03.2016. It is also stated that as per the bank statements the amount was credited to the Post office accounts on 14.03.2016 and 22.03.2016 respectively. The TD accounts were opened by postal authorities on 21.03.2016 and 31.03.2016 respectively, which was approximately Nine days later after they received the amount. The information of TD accounts are mentioned in the para no.2 of the complaint. The complainant requested the OP kindly instruct the postal authorities, Post Master, Sector-15, Panchkula to pay the interest on total sum of Rs.17,20,000/- at the rate of 1% per month for nine days which comes out to be approximately Rs.5,480/-. It is stated that the Postal Authorities at Sector-15, Post office Panchkula in connivance with Post Office agent Mrs.Sunita Singla opened his two accounts at Post office, Amravati Enclave without his knowledge instead of opening in Sector-15, Post Office. At the time of maturity of Post Office TD accounts, he was asked to collect his maturity amount from Post office Amarvati Enclave for which he was supposed to leave his clinic and go all the way to Amravati to collect the payment. Keeping in view of the difficulty of going to Amravati Enclave, he applied for the transfer of his accounts to Post Office Katchery at Barnala on 14.03.2017. The Post office Katchery, Barnala authorities forwarded his application of transfer of accounts from Post Office Amravati Enclave and Sector-15, Panchkula post office to their Head office at Sangrur (Punjab) on the same day but the head office, Sangrur didn’t transfer his account to Post office Katchery, Barnala for nearly 45 days in spite of so many reminders. After continuous persuasion by his post office agent at Barnala with postal authorities the TD accounts were transferred to Post office Katchery, Barnala in the end of April, 2017. Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered a great mental agony, physical harassment and financial loss; hence, the present complaint.

2.             Upon notices, OPs No.1 & 3 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable being frivolous, no locus standi; time barred; no cause of action; not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts.  On merits, it is stated that the complainant applied for three TDS accounts(one year duration) for total amounting of Rs.17,20,000/- for which three cheques were deposited by him. However, it is incorrect that there was delay for 9 days in credit date as stated by the complainant in his complainant. It is pertinent to mention here that the cheque No.084241 dated 10.03.2016 of Rs.8,70,000/- was presented in post office sector-15, Panchkula for opening new TD account in the name of the complainant, which was cleared on 15.03.2016 and the account was opened on 21.03.2016 by using the menu value date.  

                The cheque no.084242 dated 19.03.2016 of Rs.1,00,000/- was presented in post office for opening of new TD account in the name of complainant. The same was cleared on 23.03.2016 and the amount of the said cheque was credited on 23.03.2016. A new account no.5710027231 got opened in post office Amarwati Enclave on 31.03.2016 instead of date of clearance i.e.23.03.2016 due to technical problem with system software, hence, interest @8.4% per annum for 8 days is become Rs.184/-; hence, the calculation made by the complainant is totally false.

                It is stated that the cheque no.981928 dated 19.03.2016 for Rs.7,50,000/- was presented  for opening  of new TD account in the post office on 19.3.2016 which was  cleared on 23.03.2016 as per clearance list mentioned above new account bearing no.5710027241 got opened  on 31.03.2016 instead of date of clearance i.e. 23.03.2016 due to technical problem  with system software; hence, interest @ 8.4% per annum  for 8 days is become Rs.1,381/-. It is also pertinent to mention here that the date of opening of the amount is on 21.03.2016, 31.03.2016 and the duration of the account was for a period of one year and the complainant filed the present complaint in the month of April, 2019 which is after the expiry of limitation period as prescribed in the Consumer Protection Act.  Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs No.1 & 3 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.       

                Upon notice, OP No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable and not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts. It is stated that the father, namely, Sh. Mohan Lal Bansal of the complainant No.1, is also Post office agent and he worked with Post Office, Barnala(PB). The father of the complainant No.1 approached the OP No.2 on behalf of complainant and his wife for opening of three TD accounts and all the formalities of account opening were done in the presence of father of the complainant. All three account opening forms alongwith cheques were deposited in Post Office Sector-15, Panchkula same day by OP No.2 but due to online system of postal department two accounts were opened at Post Office Amarvati Enclave and one account was opened at Post Office, Sector-15, Panchkula. It is stated that immediately after opening of three accounts the complainants were informed that two accounts were opened at Post Office Amrawati Enclave and one account was opened at Post Office Sector-15, Panchkula and pass book of accounts were handed over to complainant in the presence of his father.  At that time complainants did not raised any objection over opening to two accounts at Post Office, Amravati Enclave.                                                                                           

3.             The complainant no.1 has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with document Annexure C-1 to C-5 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs No.1 & 3 has tendered affidavit as Annexure R-1/A along with documents Annexure R-1/1 to R-1/8 and closed the evidence. The OP No.2 has tendered affidavit as Annexure R-2/A and close the evidence.

4.             We have heard the learned counsels for the complainant and OPs No.1 to 3 and gone through the entire record including the written arguments filed by the learned counsel on behalf of the complainant, minutely and carefully.

5.             Admittedly, the complainants had availed the services of the OPs qua three separate TD accounts. The details of said TD accounts, for the sake of convenience and clarity, is given as under:-

S. No.	Name	Cheque Date	Date of payment received by post office	Date of account opening by post office	Amount of time deposit	Account No.	Post Office	Delay by days
1	Dr. Rajesh Bansal	10.03.2016	14.03.2016	21.03.2016	Rs. 870000	3221443540	Sector 15	09
2	Dr. Rajesh Bansal	19.03.2016	22.03.2016	31.03.2016	Rs. 100000	23200030	P.O. Amarvati Enclave	09
3	Poonam Gupta	19.03.2016	22.03.2016	31.03.2016	Rs. 750000	23200031	P.O. Amarvati Enclave	09

 

6.             The complainants have alleged lapses and deficiencies on the part of the OPs qua the aforementioned TD accounts on several counts, which are as under:-

i.      That there has been delay of 9 days on the part of the OPs in    opening of the said TD accounts and thus, the complainants are    entitled for the interest for the delayed period.

ii.      That the OPs have opened the TD accounts no.23200030 &       23200031 in the post office at Amaravati Enclave in place of   Sector-15, Panchkula.

iii.     That there was delay of 45 days in transferring the said TD        accounts from the post office at Sector-15, Panchkula and post   office at Amaravati Enclave, to the post office of Katchery at    Barnala and thus, interest for the delayed period has been         claimed.

7.             The OPs No.1 & 3 have resisted the complaint by raising preliminary objections as well as on merits in their joint written statement. As per preliminary objections raised in the complaint it is stated that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form and that the complainants have no locus standi to file the present complaint and that the present complaint is time barred.

                During arguments, the learned counsel for the OPs did not raise any preliminary objection except that the complaint is time barred. We find no merit in this objection as the amount was refunded to the complainants in the second week of the April, 2017 and thus, the complaint could be instituted upto two years i.e. prior to 15.04.2019.  Since, the present complaint has been filed on 08.04.2019 i.e. prior to 15.04.2019, so the complaint was filed within time.

8.             Now, we take up the above mentioned grievances of the complainants in the same seriatim as under:-

                The first grievance is about the delay on the part of the Ops while opening the said TD accounts. In this regard, the OPs No.1 & 3 have admitted the delay of 8 days on their part qua the TD account no. 23200030 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- and TD account no.23200031 amounting to Rs.7,50,000/-. The OPs have admitted that the complainants are entitled to a sum of Rs.184/- and Rs.1381/- on account of delay in respect of the aforesaid TD accounts respectively. With regard to the TD account no.3221443540 amounting to Rs.8,70,000/-, the OPs No.1 & 3 have denied any delay in opening the TD account. The contention of the Ops No.1 & 3 do not carry any force and substance as cheque no.084241 dated 10.03.2016 amounting to Rs.8,70,000/- was cleared on 15.03.2016 as per Annexure R-1 whereas the account was opened on 21.03.2016 and thus, there was delay of six days in opening the TD account pertaining to the amount of  Rs.8,70,000/- and thus, the complainants are entitled for the interest of 6 days on the sum of Rs.8,70,000/- @ 8.40%per annum.

                The second grievance of the complainants is about the opening  of TD account no.23200030 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- and TD account No.23200031 amounting to Rs.7,50,000/- at the post office Amarvati Enclave in place of post office, Sector-15, Panchkula. The Ops have admitted the fact that the error in opening the said TD accounts at Amarvati Enclave in place of post office, Sector-15, Panchkula occurred due to technical problem in their software. Needless to mention here that the complainants cannot be penalized or harmed in any manner by any error in the software of the Ops and thus, the complainants are entitled to be compensated on account of deficiencies on the part of the Ops No.1 & 3.

                The last grievance is about the delay of 45 days on the part of the Ops in transferring all the said TD accounts in question from the post office of Amarvati Enclave and Sector-15, Panchkula to the post office at Katchery, Barnala(PB). The Ops No.1 & 3 have preferred to maintain silence with regard to the reasons which prevented them to transfer the said accounts at post office at Katchery, Barnala(PB) without any delay.  The Ops No.1 & 3 have neither explained the delay of 45 days nor justified the same in transferring the aforesaid accounts from the post office of Amarvati Enclave and Sector-15, Panchkula to the post office at Katchery, Barnala(PB).Therefore, the grievances of the  complainants on account of delay in transferring the TD accounts is valid and genuine.

9.             The OP No.2, through whom the complainants have availed the facility of opening the TD accounts, has stated in her written statement that all the three accounts opening forms alongwith the cheques were deposited in post office, Sector-15, Panchkula on the same day and thus, there was no delay on her part. The OP No.2 has further averred that the TD accounts no.23200030 & 23200031 were opened in the post office at Amaravati Enclave in place of Sector-15, Panchkula due to error in the system of OP No.1.

10.            The present complaint is dismissed qua OP No.2 as no deficiency has been found on her part.

11.            In the light of above discussion, the present complaint is partly allowed with the following directions:- 

1.     The OP No.1 is directed to make the payment of interest to the complainants on the sum of Rs.8,70,000/-  @8.40% for 6 days. Further, the OP No.1 shall also make the payment of Rs.184/- and Rs.1381/- to the complainants, if already not paid.
2.     The OP No.3 is further directed to make the payment of interest @8.40% on the sum of Rs.17,20,000/-  for 45 days to the complainants  on account of delayed transfer of TD accounts from the post office of Amarvati Enclave and Sector-15, Panchkula to the post office at Katchery, Barnala(PB).
3.     The OP No.1 is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment.
4. To pay an amount of Rs.5,500/- as cost of litigation.

 

12.            The OPs No.1 & 3 shall comply with the order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71 of CP Act, 2019 against the OPs No.1 & 3. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties concerned and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced on: 16.08.2022

 

 

          Dr.Sushma Garg         Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini             Satpal

                  Member                  Member                          President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                      Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini

                                            Member