Brief facts of the case of the complainant is that the original name of the complainant is Mohuya Ghosh, daughter of late Tapas Ghosh. Tapas Ghosh purchased two Kisan Vikas Patra of Rs.1000/- each in the name of his daughter Mohuya Ghosh when she was minor. Tapas Ghosh
died on 21.12.1996. After the death of Tapas Ghosh , the mother of the petitioner married one Ajoy Koley . The name of the petitioner has been changed from Mohuya Ghosh to Puja Koley .When the Kisan Vikas Patra were purchased at that time the petitioner was minor and accordingly the Opposite party no.1 i.e. Puinan Post office quoted the date of majority as on 30.10.2013 in those two receipts. Naturally the petitioner believed the date of maturity will be 30.10.2013 and the maturity amount will be paid to her on that date. When the petitioner presented those two receipts in the office of the oP no.1 after 30.10.2013 , the Op no.1 declined to give interest from the date of issue to 30.10.2013, rather they asked the petitioner to receive double the amount on attaining 5 years from the date of issue. The petitioner tried to make them understand that when they quoted the date of majority as on 30.10.2013 of the two receipts in that event they should provide proportionate interest as per existing rule Kisan Vikas Patra. But the Op did not pay any heed of the demand of the petitioner and hence the petitioner /complainant has come before the Forum praying reliefs as stated in her petition of complaint.
To substantiate her case the petitioner has filed the original receipt of the two Kisan Vikas Patra dated 12.12.1995.
The OP, Supdt. Of Post Offices, North Hooghly Division, Chinsurah has appeared before the Forum through the Ld. Govt. Pleader, Hooghly to contest the case. By filing Written version of this complaint Ld. G.P., Hooghly denied inter alia all material allegations made by the petitioner against the Post office contending that the case is not tenable in law and the case is barred by limitation. The OP’s positive case is that two KVPs of denomination of Rs.1000/-
were purchased from Puinan Post office under registration no.10608 in the name of Mahua Ghosh, minor through her father Tapas Ghosh. The date of birth of Mohua Ghosh is 30.10.1995. Later the oP became known by Advocate’s letter that Tapas Ghosh has expired on 21.12.1996 and after expiry of Tapas Ghosh, Mahua Ghosh remarried with Ajoy Koley. The name of the minor Mahua Ghosh has been changed to Puja Koley. It was informed to the Post office only on 16.12.13 by Advocate letter. Further it is alleges that , the Post office authority did not get any information , certificate of death from the father of the petitioner or other relevant documents. It is also case of the Post office that if the petitioner would place all relevant documents including her credential of Post office the maturity value would be paid along with other interest as per Rule .The OP further states that they always ready to pay the amount provided the petitioner produce all the relevant documents.
To prove their case the OP has filed one book namely Post Office Savings Bank Manual (Volume II).
Upon the complaint, Written Version and documents filed by both the parties the following Points are framed for proper adjudication of the complaint.
POINTS
- Whether the complainant is a consumer ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the oP ?
- Whether the complainant/petitioner is entitled to get relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
Point no.1
From the complaint it is crystal clear that the father of the petitioner late Tapas Kumar Ghosh purchased two Kisan Vikas Patra amounting to Rs.1000/- each from the Puinan Post office, Hooghly, P.S. Dadpur, on 12.12.1995 in the name of the complainant i.e. Kumari Mohuya
Ghosh now Koley when she was minor. So the petitioner is a beneficiary consumer of late Tapas Kumar Ghosh u/s 2(d)(1) of the C.P.Act, 1986.
The point no.1 is thus answered in favour of the petitioner/complainant.
Point no.2
It is admitted fact that Kishan Bikash was purchased in the name of Kumari Mahua Ghosh through her father Tapas Ghosh. Date of birth of the minor is 30.11.1995. Later fact is that the said Tapas Ghosh died. The mother of Mohua Ghosh married another person. It is stated in the complaint that said Mahua Ghosh became Puja Koley and the mother of the Mahua Ghosh i.e. wife of deceased Tapas Ghosh married Ajoy Koley. But this fact of changing the natural guardian has not been rectified in the Kishan Vikash Patra. It is argued by the Post office that death certificate nor the doctor’s certificate , regarding death of Tapas Ghosh have been filed by the complainant. No marriage certificate of mother of Mahua and Ajoy Koley has been filed to substantiate factum of remarriage of mother of Mahua and Ajoy Koley. No acceptable documents have been filed before the Post office nor have been filed before this Forum to make threadbare discussion regarding the legality of claim of this complainant namely Puja Koley. It is argued also the Postal Dept. that if the petitioner would place the necessary documents before the post office then Post office would pay the maturity value along with interest to the complainant.
After scrutiny of records and statements in the complaint and evidence we find nowhere that the complainant has filed the necessary documents as discussed hereinbefore to prove her entitlement the required matured money from the Post office. Accordingly, there is negligency on the part of the complainant and there is no negligence on the part of the Post office. The complainant has failed to prove her case by adducing necessary documents and evidence.
Point no.3
So after deliberation on the facts of the case and documents therein we are of opinion that the case fails miserably for want of evidence. Hence it is –
Ordered
That the CC no.118 of 2014 be and the same is dismissed on contest .
Let a copy of this order be made over to the parties free of cost.
