Orissa

Cuttak

CC/54/2020

Batakrushna Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

Superitendent of Post Office - Opp.Party(s)

N Singh

28 Nov 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.54/2020

Bata Krushna Das,

S/O: Late Dolagobinda Das,

Resident of At:Umar (Purunamatha),

P.O:Ostapur,Via:Nischintakoili,P.S:Mahanga,

Munsif:Salipur,Dist:Cuttack,Pin -754207.                              ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1. Superintendent of Post Office(North Division),Cuttack.

15-Cantonment road,At/PO:Buxibaxar,

Town/Disst:Cuttack,Pin-753001,Odisha.

 

2. Inspector of Post Offices,Salipur Sub-Division,

Salipur Post Office,At/PO:Salipur,Disst:Cuttack,Pin-754202,Odisha.

 

3. Sub-Post Masgter,Nischintakoili(SO) Post Office,

At/PO/PS:Nischintakoili,Disst:Cuttack,754207,Odisha.

 

4. Post Master,Ostapur Branch Post Office,

At/PO/PS:Mahanga,Via:Nischintakoili,Dist:Cuttack,

Pin-754207,Odisha.                                                            ... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:Sri DebasishNayak,President.

             Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:     17.07.2020

Date of Order:   28.11.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr.N.Singh,Adv.& Associates.

For the O.Ps               :          Mr.K.S.Das,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.                                               

          Case of the complainant in nutshell is that he had availed Rural Postal Life Insurance Scheme from the O.Ps vide policy No.R-OR-EA-279066 on 31.1.2011.  Thereafter he had paid Rs.700/- per month towards the premium and had obtained the receipts from the Postmaster of the Sub-Post Office at Ostapur with his seal and signature.  The said Rural Postal Life Insurance is a Santosh Endowment Assurance Policy which was received by the complainant in the month of oJanuary,2012.  The complainant had deposited Rs.710/- on 30.6.11 and & on 30.11.2011 respectively and had obtained postal receipts from the Ostapur Sub-Post Office with the seal and signature of the Postmaster.  The said postal receipt however did not reflect the policy number of the complainant.  The complainant had deposited Rs.721/- on 28.1.2019,26.6.19 and 25.7.19and had obtained the postal receipts respectively from the Postmaster of Ostapur Sub-Post Office reflecting the seal and signature of him

          On verifying his policy bond, the complainant could know that the maturity date of the said policy is 31.1.23 and when he verified from the said branch Post Office of Ostapur he was startled to know that no amount was ever deposited by him for his said policy in the said post office.  The complainant produced the postal receipts those which he had obtained but those weredisbelieved.  He met various authorities of the Postal Department in this connection and had written to them also with proof but as no result yielded,ultimately, the complainant had to file this case before this Commission claiming his entire policy amount which is more than Rs.85,200/- alongwith interest thereon @ 12% per annum with effect from 31.1.2011 till the total amount is quantified.  He has further claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- for the deficiency in service of the O.Ps, another compensation sum of Rs.50,000/- towards his mental agony and harassment.  The complainant has further prayed for punitive damages and cost of his litigation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and further has prayed for  any other reliefs as deemed just and proper.

          The complainant has filed copies of his policy bond, copies of all the postal receipts showing his deposited amount in the Ostapur Sub-Post Office   and also copies of letters in this connection to various authorities of the Postal Department.

2.       The O.Ps however have contested this case and have filed their written version jointly.  According to the written version of the O.Ps, the  case of the complainant is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable.  Ofcourse they admit about the RPLI bearing policy No.R-OR-EA-279066 as availed by the complainant on 31.1.2011 and about the claim of deposits of the premiums by the complainant to some extent.  According to them, the matter was enquired into.  The complainant had produced before them the postal receipt no.26 dt.28.1.2019 for a sum of Rs.721/- from book no.16010, postal receipt no.10 dt.26.6.19 from book no.186003 and postal receipt no.12 dt.25.7.19 from book no.186003 for Rs.721/-.  But during enquiry it revealed that PLI-2 receipt book bearing no.186003 and 16010 were not issued in the office of the O.P no.4.  The premium amounts as collected from the complainant were not accounted for by O.P No.4.It could be made out by the O.Ps that Krushna Chandra Mallick,Ex-GDSMD/MC,Ostapur Branch office while holding additional charge of branch Postmaster,Ostapur branch office had not accounted the collected monies and had misappropriated those for which the departmental enquiry against him is still under progress and  FIR has been lodged against the said erring official Sri Krushna Chandra Mallick,Ex-GDSMD/MC,Ostapur Branch office.  The O.Ps however admit about the misappropriation and fraud committed by the said  Krushna Chandra Mallick,Ex-GDSMD/MC,Ostapur Branch office.  Ultimately the O.Ps through their written version have prayed to dismiss the complaint petition it being not maintainable.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and if they had practised unfair trade ?

iii.        Whether the complainants are entitled to the reliefs as claimed ?

Issue No.ii.

Out of the three issues, Issue no.ii being the most pertinent issue is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

          Admittedly, the complainant had opted for a Rural Postal Life Insurance Policy known as Santosh Endowment Assurance Policy bearing No.R-OR-EA-279066 from the O.Ps on 31.1.2011 and was paying the premiums as per copies of postal receipts annexed to the complaint petition.  Those postal receipts as annexed to the complaint petition when perused, it is noticed that each of those carry the seal and signature of the Postmaster of Ostapur Sub-Post Office.  The complainant wants to get back his money from the O.Ps but the plea of the O.Ps is that the departmental enquiry against the erring official Sri  Krushna Chandra Mallick,Ex-GDSMD/MC,Ostapur Branch office is under process and that he was terminated on 12.7.19.  The O.Ps have also stated that FIR has been lodged against the said erring official Krushna Chandra Mallick.  Be that as it may, admittedly the complainant had opted for the aforesaid policy bond from the O.Ps on 31.1.2011 and had been paying the premiums whose receipts he had annexed.  The plea of the O.Ps that some of the postal receipts were not issued by the authorities of the said erring official Sri  Krushna Chandra Mallick.  But here one thing is for sure that the said erring official of the O.Ps Sri  Krushna Chandra Mallick was given additional charge of Postmaster at Ostapur Sub-Post Office and in capacity of such post  he had issued postal receipts to the complainant after receiving money from him time to time and had signed on each of the postal receipts by affixing the postal seal.  The complainant in good faith had deposited his money/premium amount.  Thus, the O.Ps are found to be vicariously liable for the fraudulent act of their official who according to them had misappropriated/embezzled the money of the complainant without accounting for it.  For not returning the money of the complainant when claimed by him, the O.Ps are found to be deficient in heir service and also it indirectly signifies the practice of unfair trade by the O.Ps.  This issue is thus answered in favour of the complainant.

Issues no.i& iii.

          Keeping in mind the above discussions, it is noticed that the case of the complainant as filed is maintainable and the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                              ORDER

The case is decreed on contest against both the O.Ps who are found to be jointly and severally liable.  The O.Ps are thus directed to refund the entire deposited money of the complainant with effect from 31.1.2011 as per all the postal receipts as produced by him together with interest thereon @ 12% per annum till the total amount is quantified.  The O.Ps are further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant towards his mental agony and harassment and further to bear his litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 28^th day of   November,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.   

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                                                                                                                                                            Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                        Member