DATE OF FILING                    :    13-05-2011.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :    21-12-2011.

1.         Sri Ram Sundar Ghosh,

son of Late Amarendra Nath  Ghosh,

2.         Smt. Purnima Ghosh,

wife of Sri Ram Sundar Ghosh,

3.         Dr. Sanchita Ghosh,

d/o. Sri Ram Sundar Ghosh,

residing at 20/19, Ram Charan Sett Road,

Ramrajatala, District –Howrah,

PIN – 711104.--------------------------------------------------------  COMPLAINANTS.

-          Versus   -

1.         The Post Master,

Ramrajatala Post Office,

Department of Posts, India,

Howrah – 711104.

2.         The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,

Howrah Division, Department of Posts, India,

Kadamtala, Howrah,

PIN – 711101.

3.         The Chief Post Master General,

West Bengal Circle,

Department of Posts, India,

Yogayog Bhawan,

Kolkata – 700012.--------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P   R    E     S    E    N     T

                         1.     Hon’ble President    :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya.

                         2.     Hon’ble Member     :      Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya.

                                C      O      U       N        S        E        L

Representatives for the complainant           :   Shri Prithwiraj Sarkar,

                                                                             Shri Subhrajit Bhattacharya,   

                                                                             Ld. Advocates.

Representative for the opposite parties       :   Shri Sambhunath Samanta,

                                                                              Ld. G.P.  

                                       F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.         This is to consider an application U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps.

2.         Put briefly the fact of the case is that the complainant no. 1 deposited Rs. 60,000/- in MIS A/c No. 847315 initiated on 31-03-2004 for a period of six years and he was withdrawing monthly interest @ Rs. 400/- regularly per month. On maturity of the same scheme on 31-03-2010 when he approached the o.p. no. 1 for realizing the amount, the o.p. no. 1 verbally asked him to deposit Rs. 4,800/- as it was paid to the complainant on 15-09-2007 in excess.

3.         In the written version filed on behalf of the  o.ps. the major part of the complaint case has been admitted but the allegation of demanding Rs. 4,800/- from the complainant has been denied.  

4.         In view of the pleadings of the parties following points arose for determination   :

1.                  Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps. ?

2.                  Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH REASONS    :

5.         Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Admittedly Rs. 60.000/- was deposited with the o.p. no. 1 on 31-03-2004 and the complainant used to withdraw the interest @ Rs. 400/- per month regularly. Trouble started when the complainant approached o.p. no. 1 for realization of the matured amount of  Rs. 66,578/- and the o.p. no. 1 demanded Rs. 4,800/- as it was paid in excess to the complainant. This claim in our view is hypothetical, paradoxical and totally misconceived. The pass book reflects that on 15-09-2007 a sum of Rs. 4,800/-, the sum total of interest accrued on the deposit amount of Rs. 60,000/- @  Rs. 400/- per month for 12 months. This reflection is totally absurd as because on 15-09-2007 such interest cannot accrue in advance when several months were ahead for completion of the year.

6.         Be that as it may, ld. G.P. for the o.ps. candidly admitted that the complainant is entitled to the matured amount and since it is public money, the o.ps. should not be penalized with any sort of award towards compensation.

7.         In view of the candid submission of the ld. G.P. we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for but with respect to the compensation for Rs. 1,00,000/- , we are unable to allow the same in toto.

Accordingly both the points are disposed of.        

            Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the complaint case HDF  34 of 2011  U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 as amended till date is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps.

      That the complainants are entitled to the matured amount of Rs. 66,578/- of the MIS A/c No. 847315 together with Rs. 800/- ( Rs. 400 + Rs. 400/- ) as interest for the conclusive two months.  The o.p. no. 1 shall issue a cheque in tune of Rs. 66,578/- + Rs. 800/- ( Rs. 400 + Rs. 400/- ) as interest  for the conclusive months, together with the statutory interest within 30 days from the date of this order failing the amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum till full satisfaction of the order.

      The complainants do get a cost of Rs. 2,000/- for litigation and   compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for the suffering and mental agony.

      The o.ps. are directed to pay the aforesaid amount to the complainants within 30 days from the date of this order failing the complainants shall be at liberty to put the decree into execution.

            Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs, as per rule.