MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER

1.    This is an appeal filed by the OPs, received on transfer from Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, against order dated 14.3.2002 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ropar (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) passed in complaint case No. 224 of 21.9.2001.

2.       Briefly stated that the facts of the case are that the complainant purchased Kisan Vikas Patras (KVPs) amounting to Rs.2,00,000/- on 6.9.1995 vide registration No. 715 bearing Nos. 20CC-004045 to 20CC-004050 and 22CC-518251 to 22CC-518264, each for Rs.10,000/- from OP No.3 and the said K.V.Ps were purchased for 5 years and 6 months and the same were matured in March, 2001 and maturity value of the same were Rs.4,00,000/-. After expiry of maturity date of the said K.V.Ps, the complainant approached to the OP No.3 for encashing the same but OP No.3 lingering on the matter on one pretext or the other. The complainant approached many times to OPs No.1 to 3 for making the payment of K.V.Ps but all in vain. The above said act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, the complaint was filed.

3.       Reply was filed by the OPs and admitted that K.V.Ps amounting to Rs.2 lacs were issued in the name of Ropar District Co-op. Labour and Construction Societies Limited, Ropar on 6.9.1995. It was submitted that maturity value of K.V.Ps after 5 ½ years is double only if the same had purchased by the individuals or Charitable Trust and not if the same had purchased by any other institution like Corporation, Board, Society etc., as all the institutions debarred to invest the money in the K.V.Ps as per the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Gazette Notification. The issuance of above said K.V.Ps in the name of Cooperative Societies in question was an irregular investment and no interest was allowed on such investment as per above notification and hence, investor is entitled to the principal amount only. The complainant had concealed the facts as it never approached the respondents for withdrawal of the deposit and in fact respondent No.3 informed the Manager of the complainant vide letter dated 20.3.2001 conveying the complainant that the investment was irregular in nature and he may apply for regularization, otherwise payment would be made without interest being irregular investment as per the Government instructions. It was pleaded by the OPs that no cause of action ever arose to the complainant against the OPs as the OPs were ready to make the payments of the principal amount at any time as per rules on submission of certificates in accordance with the rules/Government Instructions. All other allegations leveled by the complainant in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

4.    The parties led their evidence in support of their contentions.

5.    The learned District Forum allowed the complaint with costs of Rs.1500/- and directed the OPs to pay to the complainant maturity value of the K.V.Ps i.e. Rs.4 lacs along with interest @ 12% p.a. w.e.f. the date of maturity i.e. 5.3.2001 till realization.

6.       Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned District Forum, the present appeal filed by the OPs and submitted that the learned District Forum acted without jurisdiction in passing the impugned order in violation of the statutory rules of the department where the purchase of K.V.Ps are barred by institution boards. In this case the complainant was not competent to invest the amount towards the purchase of K.V.Ps in contravention of the notification issued by the Government on 18.3.1995 effective w.e.f. 1.4.1995 but the complainant had purchased the K.V.Ps in the month of September, 1995 which is the irregular investment for which no interest is payable under the departmental notifications. Thus the direction given by the learned District Forum for the payment of maturity value of the K.V.Ps along with interest @ 12% p.a. is not only without jurisdiction but illegal, unwarranted, arbitrary and against the settled law. It is submitted by the appellants that no post maturity interest is payable on the K.V.Ps but in the present case the learned District Forum has passed the direction to refund the maturity value along with interest which is not sustainable in law. The learned District Forum has ignored Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act which provides that the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is in additions to but not in derogation of the existing law. The Postal Department has to act according to the statutory rules and instructions issued from time to time, therefore, the learned District Forum cannot pass any order in derogation of the departmental policy and instructions. Thus the impugned order passed by the learned District Forum is bad in law and deserves to be set aside. Hence, it is prayed that the appeal may kindly be accepted with costs.

7.    After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, it is an admitted fact that the complainant had purchased Kisan Vikas Patras worth Rs.2,00,000/- on 6.9.1995 with registration No. 715 bearing Nos. 20CC-004045 TO 20CC-004050 and 22CC-518251 to 22CC-518264, each for Rs.10,000/- from OP No.3 and the KVPs were purchased for 5 years and 6 months and the same were to mature in March, 2001 and maturity value of the same was Rs.4,00,000/-. It was submitted by the respondent/complainant that the payment of maturity value of the said K.V.Ps was not made by OP No.3 and it was informed much after the date of maturity to the Manager of the complainant that the investment made was irregular and hence he could apply for regularization failing which payment would be made without interest as per Government instructions. It was further submitted that representative of the appellants/OPs referred to letter dated 9.3.1995 conveying that Ministry of Finance had decided to discontinue the deposit by institutions in the Post Office Time Deposit, Kisan Vikas Patras, National Saving Certificates (VIII issue) w.e.f. 1.4.1995 yet this letter in no way could debar the respondent/complainant of the interest amount on the Kisan Vikas Patras as discussed above. Not only this, the appellant/OPs issued the Kisan Vikas Patras by ignoring the letter dated 9.3.1995, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of appellants/OPs.

8.       During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellants/OPs has placed on record copy of the order passed by the Hon’ble National Commission in revision petitions which were partly allowed with the direction that the respondent/complainant would not be entitled to get the maturity amount as the        K.V.Ps could not be purchased in the name of HUF, hence irregular investment but at the same time had also directed the petitioner to pay the amount deposited by the respondent along with interest @ 6% p.a. as petitioner i.e. Post Office has get and utilized the money deposited by the respondent for all this period following the principal of equity. This case in hand is securely covered by the decision rendered by the Hon’ble National Commission as in the present case K.V.Ps were purchased in the name of institution i.e. The Ropar District Co-op Labour and Construction Societies Union Limited, Ropar being an irregular investment. Therefore following the decision of Hon’ble National Commission mentioned (supra) we are of the view that the order passed by the learned District Forum is not justified and not sustainable in the eyes of law. In this view of the matter, we hereby set aside the order passed by the learned District Forum and accordingly we partly allow the appeal and direct the appellants/OPs to refund the amount deposited by the respondent/complainant i.e. Rs.2 lacs along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of deposit till the amount is/was paid to the respondent/complainant.

9.    The appeal is partly allowed with the aforesaid direction without any order as to costs. We further direct the appellants/OPs to comply with the order within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which interest @ 9% will be charged.

10.       Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.  

Pronounced.

6^th May, 2010.