Delhi

East Delhi

CC/348/2013

SANJAY GHOSH - Complainant(s)

Versus

POST OFFICE - Opp.Party(s)

29 Sep 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 348/13

 

Sanjay Ghosh

R-256, Gali No. 11

Ramesh Park, Laxmi Nagar

Delhi – 110 092                                                       ….Complainant

Vs.

 

1. Department of Posts

Senior Post Master

Indraprastha HPO

New Delhi – 110 002

 

2. Chief Post Master General

Meghdoot Bhawan

Link Road, New Delhi – 110 001                                                           ….Opponents

 

Date of Institution: 17.05.2013

Judgment Reserved for : 29.09.2016

Judgment Passed on : 21.10.2016

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

JUDGEMENT

            This complaint has been filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act by the complainant alleging deficiency in services by the complainant Shri Sanjay Ghosh against Department of Posts (OP-1) and Chief Post Master General (OP-2). 

2.        The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant purchased 30 Kisan Vikas Patras of Rs. 10,000/- each bearing series No. 25CD909301 to 25CD909330 on 30.12.2013 vide Registration no. 53548 for his minor son Master Arun Kumar Ghosh from OP-1.  The maturity period was 8 years 7 months and maturity amount was Rs. 6,00,000/-.  The said KVPs were purchased from SAS agent Smt. Anita Aggarwal.  It was further stated that the complainant had been personally visiting the office of OP-1 for release of the maturity amount.  Letters dated 29.08.2012 and 10.09.2012 were also written by the complainant to OPs giving details of the matured KVPs.  Again on 21.04.2012, RTI was filed by the complainant, the reply to which disclosed that the said KVPs were ordered to be freezed by Investigating authority and similar reason for non release of the matured amount was given in online complaint filed by the complainant on 27.11.2012 bearing complaint no. 10005214464. 

            It was also stated that the complainant was never informed by OPs about the directions of freezing the KVPs and any FIR was lodged against the SAS agent Smt. Anita Aggarwal from whom the said KVPs were purchased.  Despite several representations, the maturity amount was not released.  Legal notice dated 18.12.2012 was also sent to OPs.

                Complainant has prayed for directions to OP to release the maturity amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% from August 2012 till its realisation, Rs. 4,00,000/- as compensation for mental tension and harassment.

            The complainant has annexed the photocopies of all the KVPs, letter dated 29.08.2012 to Chief Post Master, Indraprastha HO, Letter dated 10.09.2012 to Senior Post Master, RTI dated 02.09.2012, reply from Department of Posts dated 06.10.2012, RTI dated 04.09.2012, reply to the said RTIs, legal notice dated 18.12.2012 and reply dated 04.01.2013 by OP-1 to the said legal notice.

3.        WS was filed by OPs, after they were served with the notice of the complaint.  They submitted that the said KVPs were linked with the SB fraud case committed by SAS agent Smt. Anita Aggarwal and her family members.  It was stated that the KVPs in question were issued against cheque no. 106916 dated 05.11.2013 given by Shri Bal Krishna, which was misused by Smt. Anita Aggarwal.  It was also stated that the complainant had informed in his letter dated 10.09.2012 that he had paid by cash for the purchase of said KVPs.  The said KVPs were the subject matter of the SB fraud case which were ordered to be freezed by the investigating authority, EOW of Delhi Police and the court case was pending.   The OPs refuted all the allegations against them with respect to deficiency in services and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.        Replication was filed by the complainant wherein all the contents of the complaint were reaffirmed and that of WS were denied.

5.        Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by OP, but complainant did not file any evidence despite directions.  OP examined Shri R.D. Sharma, Senior Post Master, Indraprastha, HPO who reiterated contents of WS and placed reliance on photocopies of FIRs no. 346/04 and 310/04 titled as State Vs. Anita Aggarwal under section 420, 409, 467, 468, 4761, 120B, IPC.   

6.        We have heard the Ld. Counsel for OP and perusal of the material placed on record reveals that the complainant has not filed any evidence despite opportunity.  Since, the complainant has not filed any evidence, the averments in the complaint have not been proved.  Hence, the documents annexed with the complaint cannot be looked into.  Not only that when KVPs are freezed and are subject matter of criminal case, the complaint cannot be entertained.  Hence, the same stands dismissed.

            Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member    

     

      (SUKHDEV SINGH)

             President