Narasinga Patra filed a consumer case on 10 Apr 2018 against Sr.Superintendent of Post Officers Jeypore in the Rayagada Consumer Court. The case no is CC/405/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 04 Jun 2018.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, RAYAGADA,
STATE: ODISHA.
C.C. Case No. 405 / 2015. Date. 10 . 4 . 2018
P R E S E N T .
Dr. Aswini Kumar Mohapatra, President.
Sri GadadharaSahu, Member.
Smt. Padmalaya Mishra, Member.
Sri Narasingha Patra, S/O: Neelakantha Patra, At/Po:Ambadola, Dist:Rayagada (Odisha). …. Complainant.
Versus.
1.The Sr. Superintendent of Post office, Koraput Division, Jeypore, Dist:Koraput.
2.The Post Master, Ambodalla Post office, Ambodolla, Dist: Rayagada
3. The Post Master General, Odisha, Berhampur, Dist: Ganjam.
.
……...Opp.Parties
For the Complainant:-Self..
For the O.Ps. :- In person.
.
JUDGMENT
The curx of the case is that the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service against afore mentioned O.Ps for non refund of Rs.30,000/- deposited amount in S.B. account No. 7102902 for which the complainant sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.
On being Noticed to the O.Ps the O.P. No.1appeared in person before the forum and stated that being the operational head of Koraput postal Division is competent to file the reply on behalf of all the O.Ps inter alia filed written version refuting the allegation made against them.The O.Ps taking one and other pleas in the written version sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable under the C.P. Act, 1986. The facts which are not specifically admitted may be treated as denial of the O.Ps. Hence the O.Ps prays the forum to dismiss the case against them to meet the ends of justice.
The O.Ps appeared and filed their written version. Heard arguments from the O.Ps and from the complainant. Perused the record, documents, written version filed by the parties.
This forum examined the entire material on record and given a thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced before us by the parties & vehemently opposed the complaint touching the points both on the facts as well as on law.
FINDINGS.
Undisputedly the complainant is a S.B. account holder of Ambadola Sub-post office bearing S.B. Pass book No. 7102902. Again there is no dispute a sum of Rs.30,000/- had deposited by the complainant in his S.B. account on Dt. 12.2.2011.
On conclusion of departmental inquiry, the claim papers were submitted by the O.P. No.1 to the O.P. No.3 for sancton of the defrauded amount in favour of the complainant in due observance of departmental procedures. The O.P. NO.3 has issued memo No. Inv/90-30/2011(Ch.II) Dtd. 30.5.2016 for restoration of the defrauded amount of Rs. 30,000/- with admissible interest in the S.B. account No. 71022902 held in the name of the complainant. The sanctioned amount of Rs.30,000/- with interest Rs.6,187/- has since been restored in the S.B. account No. 7102902 held in the name of the complainant. The complainant has withdrawn a part of the above amount on Dt. 18.6.2016 and is continuing further transactions in his account.
This forum observed the O.Ps. after receipt of notice from the Forum promptly has paid the S.B. account amount to the complainant and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. The present case in hand the complainant is not entitled any compensation from the O.P.
To meet the ends of justice the following order is passed.
ORDER.
Accordingly the case stands disposed off. There is no order as to cost and compensation.
Dictated and corrected by me Pronounced on this 10th.day of April, 2018.
Member. Member. President
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.