Kerala

Alappuzha

CC/151/2015

Sri.K.P.Narayanapillai - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Post Master - Opp.Party(s)

31 Mar 2016

ORDER

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Pazhaveedu P.O., Alappuzha
 
Complaint Case No. CC/151/2015
 
1. Sri.K.P.Narayanapillai
Nandavanam House,(VNRA 28),Sanathanapuram.P.O,Alappuzha.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Post Master
Department of Posts,Post Office,Ramankary,Kuttanad,Alappuzha
2. The post Master
Department Of Posts,Thiruvalla,H.O,Thiruvalla
3. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Department of Posts,Thiruvalla Division,Thiruvalla-689101
4. Smt.Sreeletha
Recuring Deposit Agent,Post offices,Ramankary,Kuttanadu,Alappuzha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. Elizabeth George PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Antony Xavier MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Jasmine. D. MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

 

 

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA

Thursday the 31st day of  March, 2016

Filed on 15.05.2015  

Present

1.Smt. Elizabeth George (President)

2.Sri.  Antony Xavier (Member)

3.Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)

 

in

C.C.No.151/2015

between

    Complainant:-                                                                              Opposite Parties:-

 

Sri. Narayana Pillai                                                                1.         The Post Master

Nandavanam House                                                                          Department of Posts

(VNRA 28) Sanathanapuram P.O.                                                    Post Office, Ramandary

Alappuzha                                                                                         Kuttanadu, Alappuzha

(By Adv. S. Sulfikar)

                                                                                               2.         The Post Master, Department

                                                                                                           Of Posts, Thiruvalla H.O.

                                                                                                           Thiruvalla

 

                                                                                          3.         The Superintendent of Post

                                                                                                      Offices, Department of Posts

                                                                                                      Thiruvalla Division

                                                                                                      Thiruvalla – 689 101

                                                        

                                                                                               4.         Smt. Sreelatha, Recurring

                                                                                                           Deposit Agent, Post Offices

                                                                                                           Ramankary, Kuttanadu

                                                                                                           Alappuzha

 

                                                              O R D E R

SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)

 

             The case of the complainant is as follows:- 

The complainant is the husband and legal representative of deceased C.P. Deepthi who breathed last on 3.1.2014.  Smt. Deepthi was holding a post office savings account (R.D.) vide No.4610480 with the first opposite party on a recurring monthly deposit @ 700/-.  The account holder had paid a total amount of Rs.37,100/- up to December 2013.  Smt. Deepthi died on 3.1.2014 and it was immediately reported to the first and fourth opposite parties.  The complainant has paid the remaining seven installments of Rs.4,900/- in total after the demise of his wife with the consent of the first opposite party.  Thus a total amount of Rs.42,000/- stood entrusted with the opposite parties for a tenure of 5 years.  Thus the complainant is legally entitled and competent to get a Rs.51,023/- including interest as per the rules and regulations in force from the opposite parties.  The opposite parties refused to pay the amount of Rs.51,023/-.  Alleging deficiency in service,  the complaint is filed.

              2.    The version of the second opposite parties   is as follows:-

 The complainant being the nominee of RD Account No. 4610480 of Smt. C.P. Deepthi submitted the claim application at Ramankary SO for  closure of the RD A/c No. 4610480 having a balance of Rs.42,000/-.  The same was forwarded to Thiruvalla HO for claim sanction.  Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO issued the sanction memo on 3.12.2014 vide Memo No. D./RD claim/146 for Rs.48,948/-.  On receiving the said memo, the complainant submitted a representation on 15.12.2014 to the Superintendent of Post Offices, Thiruvalla Division regarding non sanctioning of the full maturity amount of Rs.51,023/-.  Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO reported that the account had not been transferred to the name of the claimant as per Rule 117(iv) of POSB Manual Volume I and if, in case on death of the depositor, account is not transferred in the name of claimant and continued credits till the maturity of the account and preferred as a claim after the maturity of the account, full maturity value is not being sanctioned.  In claim cases, on maturity, proportionate amount on the date of death of the depositor is only allowed.  The deposits made after death of the depositor is refunded without interest.  On calculating the maturity value as per the rules, deposits from 8/2009 to 12/2013 is Rs.37,100/- which is up to the death of depositor and interest admissible is Rs.6,948/-.  So the maturity value will be Rs.44,048/- and rest deposits Rs.4900/- made by the nominee without following the procedure as per the above mentioned rule, refunded without any interest as per Rule 87 (11) of POSB Manual Volume I.  The complainant’s claim for interest to the irregularly made deposits of Rs.4900/- cannot be entertained as per the rules prevailing.  The 4th opposite party is collecting the amount from the depositor monthly and depositing at the Post Office on behalf of the depositor.  The 4th opposite party should know about the demise of the depositor.  If the nominee of the account does not know about the procedure, she should have informed the rule position of the department to the complainant.  First opposite party has no information about the demise of the depositor till getting the claim application.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. 

          3.  The complainant was examined as PW1.  The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A6.  First opposite party was examined as RW1.  Documents produced were marked as Exts.B1 to B4.

            4.    The points that arose for consideration are as follows:-

1)  Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties?

            2)  If so the reliefs and costs?  

 

            5.   Complainant is the husband of Deepthi who died on 3.1.2014.  It is an admitted fact that said Deepthi was holding a post office savings account (RD) vide No. 4610480 with the first opposite party on a recurring monthly deposit @ Rs.700/-.  She had remitted Rs.37,100/- up to December 2013.  After the death of Deepthi, complainant has paid the remaining seven installments of Rs.4900/-.  According to the complainant, he is entitled to get Rs.51,023/- including interest from the opposite parties.  But according to the opposite party as per Rule 117 (iv) of POSB Manual Volume I, it is established that ‘if the legal heir/nominee desires to continue the account till maturity he must furnish an application in form SB3.  The account will then be transferred in the name of the legal heir/nominee’.  As per Rule 87 (11) of POSB Manual Vol I (Rule 11 of SB order No. 25/2010), if in case of death of the depositor, account is not transferred in the name of the claimant and continued credits till the maturity of the account and preferred as a claim after the maturity of the account, full maturity value is not being sanctioned.  In claim cases, on maturity, proportionate amount on the date of death of the depositor is only allowed.  The deposits made after death of the depositor is refunded without interest.  In order to substantiate this contention they produced the copies of Rule No.117 (iv) and 87 (11) of POSB Manual Volume I and Rule 11 of SB order No. 25/2010 as Exts.B1, B2 and B3.  Hence according to the opposite parties the complainant is entitled only Rs.44,048/- and rest deposit Rs.4900/- will be refunded without interest.   Complainant produced the pass book which marked as Ext.A1.  On verifying the Ext.A1 we can see that opposite party has accepted all the 60 deposits.  While cross examining the RW1 he admitted that the 4th opposite party is their agent and the subscriber remitted the deposits through her.  Complainant deposed before the Forum that he informed the death of his wife to the agent and thereafter along with agent he went to see the first opposite party.  The said agent was the 4th opposite party.  She did not file version denying the allegation of the complainant.  Later she was set ex-parte.  According to the complainant he had got full amount from another Post office savings account which started by his wife and completed by him.  The said pass book of Post Office savings account (RD) vide No.1210636 issued from the Sub Post Office, Alappuzha Medical College is also produced which marked as Ext.A6.  Ext.A6 shows that the wife of the complainant started the deposits on 20.1.2010 and continued by her husband after her death and closed on 27.12.2014.  According to the complainant, opposite party has no objection in paying the full amount in that account.  Smt. Deepthi the wife of the complainant started the savings much earlier on 23.12.2014.  After the implementation of revised rule as per Ext.B1 the opposite party did not take any steps  to submit the transfer form as per the revised  rule to the deceased during her life time.  There is no case for opposite party that during her life time she was intimated about it.  Admittedly full amount of 60 installments were recurred without objection and complainant himself is the nominee of the deceased depositor, who is entitled to receive the full amount.  Ext.A6 shows that there was no objection from the opposite party in paying the full amount to the complainant.  Hence opposite party has no right to implement different rules to the same person for the same matter.  Since full amount was received by opposite party and the revised rule has no retrospective effect, the opposite party is liable to pay the earlier benefits covered by the scheme to the complainant.  The failure on the part of the opposite parties in paying the full amount to the complainant amounts to deficiency in service.    

            In the result, complaint is allowed.  The opposite parties 1 to 3 are directed to  give Rs.51,023/- with 9% interest per annum from 22.7.2014 till realization to the complainant.  The opposite parties 1 to 3 are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards costs of the proceedings to the complainant.  Since primary relief is granted further relief for compensation is not allowed.  The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.    

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the day 31st  day of March, 2016.

                                                                          Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :

                                                                          Sd/- Sri. Antony  Xavier (Member)      :

                                                                          Sd/- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)            :

Appendix:-

Evidence of the complainant:-

 

PW1                -           K.P. Narayana Pillai (Witness)          

 

Ext.A1                        -           RD Pass book – A/c No. 4610480

Ext.A2                        -           True copy of the legal notice dated 25.2.2015

Ext.A3            -           Postal receipts (4 Nos.)

Ext.A4                        -           Acknowledgement cards (3 Nos.)

Ext.A5                       -           Reply notice dated 26.3.2015

Ext.A6                        -           RD pass book – A/c No.1210636

 

Evidence of the opposite parties:-

 

RW1                -           Gopalakrishna Pillai (Witness)

 

Ext.B1             -           True copy of Rule 87(11) of POSB Manual Volume 1

Ext.B2             -           True copy of Rule 117(iv) of POSB Manual Volume 1

Ext.B3             -           True copy of SB-3 card of RD Account No. 4610480

 

 

// True Copy //

 

                                                           By Order                                                                                                                                      

 

Senior Superintendent

To

         Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.

 

Typed by:- pr/- 

Compared by:-

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Elizabeth George]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Antony Xavier]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Jasmine. D.]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.