BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President
And
Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Tuesday the 9th day of August, 2011
C.C.No.156/2010
Between:
N.Sunkanna, S/o Late N.Ramanna, Retired A.E.O., in Agriculture Department,
R/o H.No.1045-1 A, Opp. Bharathi vidya Mandir, Sai Baba Nagar,
Nandyal Town-518 501, Kurnool District.
…Complainant
-Vs-
The Assistant Director of Agriculture (R),
D.No.30-335, OPP. High way lodge, Noonepalli, Nandyal Town-518 501, Kurnool District.
…OPPOSITE PARTY
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri D.Kumara Swamy, Advocate for complainant and Smt.D.S.Saileela,
Government Pleader for opposite party for upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member)
C.C. No. 156/2010
1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying to direct the opposite party:-
- To pay the interest amount at the rate of 24% P.A. which as loss by the complainant over the GPF Cheque amount of Rs.91,585/- from 19-08-2008 to 20-09-2010 due to the negligence act of opposite party and further interest from the date of filling of the complaint and award mental agony for Rs.10,000/-as the complainant suffered lot for the last two years;
- To costs of the complaint;
- As against opposite party and further orders, relief, reliefs as the Honourable Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant is a retired employee, who worked as a A.E.O. in the office of the opposite party. He retired from his service in the month of December, 2007. He had received the retirement benefits from the Government in the month of April, 2008 and submitted his G.P.F. papers in the month of May, 2008, but opposite party send it in the month of July, 2008 to the concerned authorities. The opposite party and his staff neglected to send them. Thereafter the G.P.F. amount was sanctioned, the opposite party and his staff are insisting and expecting something from the complainant in order to issue G.P.F. amount and postponed the same. The complainant approached the opposite party office several times, but did not responded for last 2 years. Recently the complainant received a registered cover from opposite party and shocked after verification a cheque bearing No.53531 for Rs.91,585/- dated 19-08-2008 and later it was altered to revalidated on 20-09-2010 it is marked as Ex.A1. Due to the act of negligence of opposite party and his staff, the complainant has suffered lot of mental agony and sustained interest loss over the cheque amount of Rs.91,585/-from 19-08-2008. The complainant got issued legal notice dated 01-11-2010 which is marked as Ex.A2 and acknowledged the same by opposite party it is marked as Ex.A3. The opposite party has given reply notice dated 06-11-2010, it is marked as Ex.A4.
3. Opposite party field written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable. There is no privity of contract between the complainant and opposite party. According to the opposite party the complainant is not a consumer under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. According to the opposite party immediately after retirement of complainant from his service, all necessary papers were forwarded to the Accountant General, A.P. Hyderabad. The complainant come and collected the earned leave salary and policy amount cheque No.890488 dated 28-03-2008 for an amount of Rs.42,604/- towards Refund of Policy Amount. The opposite party received sanctioned letter from the office of Accountant General Hyderabad for an amount of Rs.91,585/- towards G.P.F. final payment payable to the complainant. The opposite party obtained D.D. for the said amount on 19-08-2008 and the same was informed to the complainant several times orally. The complainant while in service availed personal loan from Syndicate Bank, Nandyal in the year 2002. At that time, the Assistant Director of Agriculture Nandyal and the complainant executed irrevocable letter of authority in favour of the Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank, Nandyal. In the said letter the complainant and A.D.A. agreed to pay the loan amount or any installment by deducting from the salary the complainant or from any amount payable to the complainant. As the complainant failed to discharge the loan amount, the Branch Manager Syndicate Bank, Nandyal sent a letter to the opposite party on 10-01-2008, it is marked as Ex.B2 requesting him to send an amount of Rs.64,308/- out of the retirement benefits towards discharge of the loan borrowed by the complainant. The opposite party informed the same to the complainant to settle the loan amount with the bank and received D.D., but the complainant not turn up for a long time. The Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank send another three letters dated 28-02-2009 it is marked as Ex.B6 and again on 07-07-2010 which is marked as Ex.B9 and on 23-07-2010 which is marked as Ex.B10 and requests opposite party to take necessary steps for recovering the loan amount. The opposite party informed the same to the complainant but he did not respond. As the complainants not came and collect the D.D. The opposite party addressed a letter on 13-08-2010 requiring him to collect the D.D. it is received by the complainant on 18-08-2010. Even then the complainant did not come to collect it, opposite party has revalidated the D.D. and send it by registered post on 19-10-2010 and acknowledge the same by the complainant on 27-10-2010. After the receipt of D.D. the complainant issued a legal notice dated 01-11-2010, for which the opposite party issued reply notice on 06-11-2010. The delay caused was any due to the negligence of complainant himself not an account of opposite party. Hence opposite party is not liable to pay interest amount as claimed by the complainant. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A4 are marked and sworn affidavit of complainant is filed. On behalf of the opposite party Ex.B1 to B15 are marked and sworn affidavit of opposite party is filed.
5. Both sides filed written arguments.
6. The points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether the complainant is Consumer?
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite Party?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINT No.1:- The complainant is retired employee who worked as A.E.O. in the office of opposite party. He retired from his service in the month of December, 2007 and he had received all the retirement benefits from the Government in the month of April, 2008. The complainant filed the present complaint praying to direct the opposite party to pay sustained interest loss for G.P.F. amount of Rs.91,585/- from 19-08-2008 to 20-09-2010 for which the opposite party caused delay to send the cheque from last two years.
The learned counsel for opposite party submitted that the complainant is not a consumer under C.P. Act. The first and fore most point which arises for determination is whether the complainant is consumer or not. The Honourable Delhi State Commission inclined to hold in 2011 C.T.J. page 110 C.P (S.C.D.R.C) that a pensioner cannot be held to be a Consumer under Section 2 (1) (d) of Consumer Protection Act. His status as a pensioner is an extension of service tenure which is governed by the usual contract between an employee and his employer. It cannot be said that a pensioner is a Consumer. After the perusal of the above decision, we are inclined to hold that the complainant in this case is not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act.
8. Points 2 and 3:- Admittedly the complainant is a retired employee in the office of opposite party and he received all his retirement benefits in the month of April 2008. According to the complainant, he has submitted G.P.F. papers in the month of May 2008. Opposite party send it in the month of July 2008 to the concerned authorities. Thereafter the G.P.F., amount was sanctioned but the opposite party and his staff were insisting and expecting something from the complainant in order to issue GPF amount and post pond the same from last 2 years. The complainant received the cheque bearing No.53531, dated 19-08-2008 and later it was altered to revalidate on 20-09-2010 it is marked as Ex.A1. The learned counsel for opposite party submitted that all the necessary papers send to the Accountant General A.P. Hyderabad. There is no delay to send the papers and further submitted that the complainant availed personal loan from Syndicate Bank, Nandyal in the year 2002. At that time the Assistant Director of Agriculture Nandyal and the complainant executed irrevocable authorization latter in favour of the Bank Manager, Syndicate Bank. In that letter he agreed to pay the amount of any installment by deducting from the salary of the complainant or any amount payable to the complainant. As the complainant failed to discharge the loan amount, the Branch Mange, Syndicate Bank send a letter to the opposite party dated 10-01-2008, it is marked as Ex.B2 requesting him to send an amount of Rs.64,308/- out of his retirement benefits towards the discharge of the loan amount. The opposite party informed the same to the complainant to settle the loan amount. The complainant came and collected the earned live salary and policy amount of Rs.42,604/- towards the refund of policy cheque bearing No.890488 on 28-03-2008. The opposite party received another three letters from the Syndicate Bank Manager, Nandayl dated 28-02-2009 it is marked as Ex.B6 and on 07-07-2010 which is marked as Ex.B9. Again on 23-07-2010 it is marked as Ex.B10 requesting the opposite party take suitable action in the matter for recovering of the due loan amount.
As seen from Ex.B7 dated 28-03-2008 it is clear that the complainant come and collected the cheque bearing No.890488, towards refund of policy amount of Rs.42,604/-. As per Ex.B2, Ex.B6, Ex.B9 and Ex.B10 the letters addressed to opposite party by the Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank, Nandayal, it is established that the complainant has not settled the loan amount for which the complainant and opposite party also executed irrevocable authorization letter and opposite party stood as a guarantor.
9. According to the complainant the cheque bearing No.53531 for an amount of Rs.91,585/- was issued on 19-08-2008 but it was later revalidated on 20-09-2010 and send it by registered post which is marked as Ex.A1. The learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that several times, the opposite party informed him about the settlement of loan but he did not respond. On 13-08-2010 the opposite party send a letter to the complainant to take the cheque. The complainant acknowledge the same on 18-08-2010 it is marked as Ex.B11. As the complainant not come and collected the D.D the opposite party send the cheque through registered post on 19-10-2010 and acknowledge the same by him on 27-10-2010 it is marked as Ex.B12. As seen from Ex.B11 and Ex.B12 it is very clear that the opposite party informed the complainant to collect to the cheque but he did not choose to collect it. Therefore it was revalidated and send it to him. It is already clear that the complainant has not discharge loan amount.
After the receipt of cheque the complainant issued legal notice which is marked as Ex.A2 and Ex.B13 dated 01-11-2010 for which the opposite party has given reply notice dated 06-11-2010 it is marked as Ex.A4 and Ex.B14 and postal acknowledgment dated 08-11-2010 marked as Ex.B15.
We consider all the material placed on record and hold that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant. The complainant is not entitled for the reliefs as prayed for. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
10. In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 9th day of August, 2011.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant : Nil For the opposite party : Nill
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Photo copy of Cheque bearing No.535315
dated 19-08-2008.
Ex.A2. Office copy of Legal Notice dated 01-11-2010.
Ex.A3 Postal receipt.
Ex.A4 Reply notice issued by opposite party dated 06-11-2010.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:-
Ex.B1 Photo copy of Proceedings of the opposite party
dated 07-01-2008.
Ex.B2 Letter to Syndicate Bank Addressed to opposite party dated 10-01-2008.
Ex.B3 Letter of Complainant to opposite party dated 10-01-2008.
Ex.B4 No due Certificate issued by M.A.O. Panyam Mandal
Kurnool District dated 18-02-2008.
Ex.A5 Office copy of letter of opposite party to A.G., Hyderabad
dated 21-02-2008.
Ex.A6 Letter to Syndicate Bank to opposite party
dated 28-02-2009.
Ex.A7 Receipt of Complainant dated 31-03-2008.
Ex.A8 Office copy of letter of opposite party to A.G., Hyderabad
dated 24-03-2008.
Ex.A9 Letter to Syndicate Bank to opposite party
dated 07-07-2008.
Ex.A10 Letter to Syndicate Bank to opposite party
dated 23-07-2010.
Ex.A11 Office copy of Memo issued to complainant
dated 13-08-2010 with Acknowledgement.
Ex.A12 Office copy of Memo issued to complainant
dated 19-10-2010 with Acknowledgement.
Ex.A13 Legal Notice issued by Counsel of Complainant
dated 01-11-2010.
Ex.A14 Reply Notice by A.G.P.to Complainant’s Counsel
dated 06-11-2010.
Ex.A15 Postal Receipt dated 08-11-2010.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
