Punjab

Sangrur

CC/566/2014

Rimpy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Post Office Ahmedgarh - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Jatinder Verma

05 Mar 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                                                               

 

                                                Complaint No.  566

                                                Instituted on:    24.09.2014

                                                Decided on:       05.03.2015

 

Rimpy D/o Dr. Sham Lal # 232/9, Near Jain School, Tagore Nagar, Ahemdgarh and now W/O Shri Harinder Pal Singla, R/o # 119/3, W.No.11-A, Shivpuri Mohalla, Dhuri, Distt. Sangrur.

                                                        ..Complainant

                                        Versus

1.     Post Office Ahemdgarh through its Sub Post Master/Authorised signatory, Distt. Sangrur.

2.     Kamaldeep Kaushal son of Shri Baldev Krishan, W.No.6, Purani Tehsil Chowk, Ahmedgarh, authorised agent of OP number 1.

3.     Union of India through its Secretary, Department of Posts, Government of India, New Delhi.

                                                        ..Opposite parties

 

For the complainant  :       Shri Jatinder Verma, Advocate.

For OPs No.1&3       :       Shri Kali Ram Garg, Advocate.

For OP No.2             :       Shri Mohd. Azhar, Advocate.

 

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                K.C.Sharma, Member

                Sarita Garg, Member

 

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Smt. Rimpy, 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 opened a public provident fund account by depositing Rs.500/- with OP number 1 through OP number 2 and the OP number 1 allotted account number 44441 on 1.3.2008. It is further averred that the entries were made by the OPs in the PPF pass book.  The case of the complainant is that he made some payments through OP number 2 to OP number 1 and some payments were made directly to OP number 1 and by this way the total amount of Rs.1,59,665/- was standing in the account of the complainant on 26.6.2014 and for the same the OP has issued duly stamped receipts regarding the same.  The complainant was very much astonished to know when he went to the OP number 1 to deposit Rs.20,000/- on 26.6.2014 and the OP number 1 told that the balance differs from their ledger and in the pass book.  On enquiry from OP number 1, it was told that the entries dated 8.2.2011 for Rs.58,000/- and entry dated 31.12.2011 for Rs.35,000/- are missing and the complainant is not entitled for that amount. It is further averred that the complainant requested OP number 1 that she deposited the amount and she was issued duly stamped receipts, as such she is entitled to get the full amount i.e. 1,59,665/- on 26.6.2014 in her account. The complainant requested the OPs to enter the whole of the deposited amount, but nothing happened. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed not to deduct any amount and the OPs be directed to issue complete pass book showing balance of Rs.1,59,665/- as on 28.6.2014 and further to pay compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by Ops number 1 and 3, legal objections are taken up on the ground that Shri Kamaldeep Kaushal, OP number 2 was appointed as PPF agent by the State Government/Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur as such without impleading the Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, the complaint is not maintainable.  It is further stated that in the instructions issued by the Department of Finance, Government of India, it has been laid down that if any fraud is committed by any agent in that case, the State Govt is responsible for the loss.  It is further stated that the fraud has been committed by OP number 2 Kamaldeep Kaushal, the OPs number 1 and 3 have no concern with the case in hand.  That the complicated questions of law and fact are involved in the present case. It is further stated that a number of FIRs have already been registered against OP number 2 for misappropriation of public money and at presen he is in Sub Jail Malerkotla, as such, the complaint is not maintainable. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant had opened a PPF account number 44441 on 1.3.2008 with Sub Post Office, Ahemdgarh with an initial deposit of Rs.500/- through Shri Kamaldeep Kaushal, PPF Agent. It is stated that OP number 2 is neither employee of OPs number 1 and 3 nor was appointed as agent by Ops number 1 and 3.   It is further stated that the complainant visited Ahemdgarh Sub Post Office on 26.6.2014 for depositing Rs.20,000/- in her above said account, when the concerned postal assistant found that there was a difference between balance of the passbook and in computer ledger, he immediately informed the depositor about the difference in balance.  After further scrutiny of the records of the post office, it was found that there was no entry of Rs.35,000/- dated 31.12.2011 in record of Post office Ahmedgarh.  Remarks of ‘balance differ’ was given in the pass book by the concerned counter postal assistant on 26.6.2014.   It is further stated as the complainant handed over the amount to the agent i.e. OP number 2, the same has been misappropriated by him, the Ops number 1 and 3 are not at all responsible.  It is stated that the balance as on 26.6.2014 in respect of the account of the complainant is Rs.1,44,269/- as per the ledger available with OP number 1.  It is stated that the complainant is not entitled to receive any amount from OPs number 1 and 3 as the amount of Rs.35,000/- has been misappropriated by Kamaldeep Kaushal, OP number 2.  Any deficiency in service on the part of OP number 1 and 3 has been denied.

 

3.             In reply filed by OP number 2, it is admitted that the complainant opened a provident fund account number 44441 through OP number 2. It is stated that OP number 2 deposited all the payments with OP number 1. It is for the OP number 1 to inform the claimant about the amount of Rs.159665/- was standing in the account of the complainant on 26.6.2014.  The other allegations in the complaint have been denied by OP number 2.  Apart from that, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form, that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 copy of PPF account passbook, Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-11 copy of receipts, Ex.C-12 affidavit, Ex.C-13 copy of receipt and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP number 1 and 3 has produced Ex.OP1&3/1 list of transactions, Ex.OP1&3/2 copy of PPF account statement, Ex.OP1&3/3 copy of letter dated 4.9.2014, Ex.OP1&3/4 copy of rule regarding PPF, Ex.OP1&3/5 affidavit and closed evidence.  The learned counsel for OP number 2 has produced Ex.OP2/1 affidavit and closed evidence.

 

5.             We have very carefully perused the pleadings of the parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits dismissal, for these reasons.

 

6.             It is an admitted fact that the complainant had opened a PPF account number 44441 by the complainant with OP number 1 through OP number 2.   The learned counsel for the complainant has contended that the OPs have misappropriated the entries for Rs.58,000/- dated 8.2.2011 and for Rs.35,000/- dated 31.12.2011.  On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 1 and 3 has contended vehemently that the amounts so deposited by the complainant were duly credited in her account.  It is contended further that the entry of Rs.58,000/- dated 8.2.2011 has duly been shown in the record, as is evident from the copy of statement on record as Ex.OP1&3/2.  Now, the question remains only for the non deposit of Rs.35,000/- on 31.12.2011.  The learned counsel for the complainant has contended that though an amount of Rs.35,000/- was deposited on 31.12.2011 and the entry for the same was also made in the pass book, but the same was misappropriated by the OPs.   The learned counsel for OP number 1 and 3 has contended that this amount of Rs.35,000/- might have been misappropriated by the OP number 2  as a number of cases of fraud have already been registered against the OP number 2 for misappropriation of public money.  Moreover, OP number 2 has been appointed as an agent by the State Government of Punjab, which was a very much necessary party and the fraud if any caused by Op number 2, then the State of Punjab is only responsible for the same and OPs number 1 and 3 are not at all liable for the same.  To support such a contention, the learned counsel for OPs number 1 and 3 has cited State of Punjab and another versus Amardeep Kaur and others 2009(4) CLT 470 (NC), wherein the Hon’ble National Commission has held that where the agent is appointed by the State Government, and where the agent has misappropriated the money, the State Government is squarely liable for misappropriation of investor’s money by the agent appointed by one of its authorised officers.  As such, in the present case, since the complainant has not arrayed the State Government as a party and further so many FIRs have already been registered against OP number 2, the present complaint is not maintainable before this Forum.  Moreover, complicated question of law and facts and fraud are also involved in this case, as such, this Forum is not competent to hear and decide the present case.

 

7.             In view of our above discussion, we find no merit in the complaint and the same is dismissed. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                March 5, 2015.

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                           President

 

 

                                                              (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                Member

 

 

                                                                (Sarita Garg)

                                                                   Member