DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM , CIVIL STATION<br /> Palakkad – 678 001, Kerala<br /> Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2008<br /> Present: Prof.O.Unnikrishnan, President (I/C)<br /> Mrs.K.P.Suma, Member<br /> C.C.No.44/2007<br /> K. John<br /> 83 years<br /> 6779793 Ex. NK<br /> Tharayankandath House,<br /> P.O. Olavakkode, Palakkad - Complainant<br /> (Rep. by. Adv.K.G.Aravindakshan)<br /> Vs<br /> 1.The Branch Manager,<br /> State Bank of India<br /> Olavakkode <br /> 2. The Chief General Manager<br /> State Bankof India<br /> Local Head Office<br /> S S Kovil Road<br /> Thampanoor<br /> Thiruvananthapuram- 695 001 - Opposite parties<br /> (Rep. By Adv.Gourisankar and G.Ananthakrishnan)<br /> O R D ER<br /> By Smt. K.P. Suma, Memebr<br /> Complainant in this case is a retired person from Army after serving 21 years and 108 days as Naik group E. The complainant submits that he is disabled and getting disability pension for 70% disability and both service pension and disability pension are paid together up to 31.12.1985. <br /> <br /> - 2 -<br /> Complainant complains that the pension fixed at the time of discharge was wrong and the same were corrected on representation by the CDA, Allahabad vide corrigendum P P O No.50/2001 (CDI) and corrigandum PPO No.D/172/2002 (CD2) and when the Respondents failed to pay the arrears the complainant sought the help of defence Pension for Adalat (CD3) for getting the pension arrears paid.<br /> <br /> Complainant further states that with effect form 01.04.2004, 50% Dearness Relief merged with Basic service and disability pensions and he is now drawing these pensions. <br /> <br /> He also claims that he is entitled to get revised service pension for 21 years of his service and the pension disbursing authority out to have paid the revised pension or or before 30.09.2006. But the 1st Respondent failed to pay the revised pension till this date inspite of repeated requests without assigning any reason.<br /> <br /> The complainant alleges that under these circumstances the complainant was forced to approach the National Ex-Serviceman Co-ordination Committee, Palakkad, and they represented the facts to the Chief General Manager and Branch Manager with copy to Chairman, State Bank of India as per CD7. But they have neither sent any reply or nor paid the revised pension due since 01.01.2006.<br /> <br /> The complainant submits that he is 83 years, disabled, sick and is going under treatment and he has to depend on others to move about. He staying in a rented house and has no other income for his livelihood.<br /> <br /> - 3 -<br /> It is further submitted that the respondents No.1 and 2 did not take any interest to pay the revised pension and there is gross negligence and deficiency of service on their part. Instead of respecting and helping the senior citizens the respondents neglected these citizens and such attitude of the respondents aggravated the health of the complainant both mental and physical apart from creating financial strain.<br /> <br /> Hence the complainant prays before this forum to admit the complaint and direct the Respondents to pay the arrears of pension as per the order CD5, to direct the Respondents to pay interest @ 18% per annum on arrears of pension payable to his with effect from 01.10.2006 till the date of payment with costs, to direct the respondents to enter the pension payment and revision of pension in pension book and further to direct the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation for physical strain, mental agony, financial sufferings and inconvenience caused to the complainant.<br /> <br /> Notice was served and opposite party entered appearance and filed version. <br /> <br /> The opposite party in their version denies all the averments contained in the complaint.<br /> <br /> The averment that the Pension Disbursing Authority ought to have paid the revised pension on or before 30.09.2006 and the 1st respondent failed to pay the revised pension till this date in spite of repeated requests without assigning any reason is not correct.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> - 4 -<br /> The opposite party alleges that the complainant was compelled to approach the National Ex-Service Men Co-ordination Committee, Palakkad and they represented his grievance to the Chief General Manager and Branch Manager with copy to Chairman, State Bank of India and they have neither sent any reply or paid the revised due since 01.01.2006 is not fully correct and hence denied by the opposite party.<br /> <br /> The averment that the complainant is an old man he is disabled sick and is undergoing treatment and he has to depend on others to move about and he is living in a rented house and he is having no other income etc, are not known to these opposite party and therefore denied.<br /> <br /> The averment that the respondents did not take any interest to pay the revised pension and there is gross negligence and deficiency of service and instead of respecting and helping the Senior Citizen the respondents have neglected these citizens is totally in correct and hence denied.<br /> <br /> The opposite further submits that they never enter the pension payments and revision of pension dearness relief changes from time to time in the pension book of the complainant is not correct and hence denied.<br /> <br /> The averment that the attitude of the opposite parties have aggrieved the health of the complainant both mental and physical apart from creating financial strain is not correct and hence denied.<br /> <br /> <br /> - 5 -<br /> It is also averred in the version that as per the instruction received from Centralized Pension Processing Centre, Trivandrum, the Opposite parties have already paid a sum of Rs.7,427/- towards arrears payable to him on 14.03.2007 and he was advised accordingly.<br /> <br /> It was also submitted that the processing of pension payments at their branch is being done by the Centralized Pension Processing Centre, Trivandrum from March 2006. The pension could not be revised earlier as his original pension order classified his group as Naik as per the Government order. So opposite parties referred his case to CDA pension, Allahabad for clarification as per Government instructions, on 16.11.2006 opposite parties have now revised the pension on the basis of the amendment order.<br /> <br /> There was no deficiency in service as alleged in the complaint as the complainant is not entitled for any amount claimed in the petition. Opposite party also averred that the complainant is not a consumer as defined under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act. Hence the complaint has to be dismissed with costs.<br /> <br /> Complainant and Opposite party filed proof affidavit to substantiate their contentions.<br /> <br /> Exhibits A1 to A7 were marked from the side of the complainant. Evidence was closed. Matter was heard.<br /> <br /> We have perused the affidavits and documents produced before the forum<br /> <br /> <br /> - 6 -<br /> It is obvious from Exhibit B5 that Government of India, Ministry of Defence letter No.14(3) 2004-D (Pensioners) dated 02.05.2006 that the Pension Distributing Authorities may be authorised by PCDA(D) to carry out revision with effect from 01.01.2006 and the pension revision may be completed by 30.09.2006.<br /> <br /> It is noticed that revised pension was paid to the complainant only on 14.03.2007. But the contention of the opposite party for the delay in disbursing the revised pension to the complainant before 30.09.06 was not substantiated by documentary evidence. It is true that there was a delay of 5 months and 14 days in the payment of revised pension. It is strange to drag a senior citizen aged 83 years before the forum for seeking order in connection with his revised pension. In this context, we attribute deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. In the result, we allow the complaint partly.<br /> <br /> Hence we direct the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.500/- to the complainant along with Rs.250/- as cost of these proceedings. The aforesaid amount shall be paid within one month from the date of communication of this order.<br /> <br /> Pronounced in the open court on this the 22nd day of January 2008<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT (IN CHARGE) (SD)<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER (SD)<br /> <br /> - 7 - <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> Exhibits marked on the side complainant<br /> 1.Ext.A1 - Letter dated 16.02.01 from Allahabad PCDA (Photocopy)<br /> 2.Ext.A2 – Corrigendum P P O No.D/172/02<br /> 3.Ext. A3 – Letter dated 13.10.03 Defence Pension Adalat letter<br /> 4.Ext. A4 – Letter from State Bank of India, Olavakkode dated 25.07.02<br /> 5. Ext.A5 – Letter from Government of India, Ministry of Defence dated 02.05.06<br /> 6.Ext. A6 – Table No. 3 to letter 14(3) (2004-D (Pensioner) Vol.V )<br /> dated 02.05.06<br /> 7. Ext. A7 – National Ex Servicemen Co-ordiantion Committee letter dated 29.01.07.<br /> <br /> Exhibits marked on the side Opposite Party <br /> <br /> Nil<br /> Forwarded/By Order<br /> Sd/-<br /> Senior Superintendent.