IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Friday, the 31st day of August, 2017
Filed on .21.10.2016.
Present
1) Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2) Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3) Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.289/2016
Between
Complainant: Opposite party:
Sri. Reghunathan 1. The Secretary
Nikathil Postal Telecom & BSNL
Veliyanadu.P.O Employees Co-operative Society
Changanassery(via) 688950 Ltd No- 1940, Trivandrum
2. The Sale Officer
C/o Secretary
Postal, Telecom &BSNL
Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No 1940, Trivandrum
3. The Post Master
Head Office, Thriuvalla
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant was a Post Master of Veliyanadu Post Office during the period from 2001 to 2005. Mr. P.N. Shaji had taken a loan of Rs.25,000/- from the first opposite party and complainant was one of the sureties. While Mr. Shaji was on Government service since he misused the Government fund and he was dismissed from the service. Thereafter for the dues committed by Mr. Shaji, the first opposite party sent notice to the complainant and the other surety. Accordingly the 3rd opposite party recovered Rs.2,000/- each from the salary of the complainant and remitted to the first opposite party. On 22.02.2011 as per the direction of the Sales Officer, all the due amounts were recovered from the sureties and accordingly the opposite party closed the loan account of Shaji. But the 3rd opposite party recovered Rs.2,000/- from the salary of the complainant during month of February, 2011. Since all the dues were settled the 3rd opposite party has no right to recover the amount of Rs.2,000/- from the salary of the complainant. Complainant sent several letters to the opposite parties requesting to refund the said amount with interest, but so far they did not return the amount. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complaint is filed.
2. Notice issued against opposite parties 1 to 3 were served. Opposite party 1and 3 filed version.
3. The version of the first opposite party is as follows:-
Complaint is not consumer. The complaint is time barred as per Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act. On the strength of the sureties the complainant and Mr. C. Thomas, the loan was sanctioned to Mr. P.N. Shaji. But the principle debtor and sureties violated the agreement and hence arrears were accumulated. Therefore as per the award of the Arbitration Court, an amount of Rs.20,627/- with interest were ordered to credit into the loan account of Shaji. But the defaulters had not turned up to satisfy the debt. Thereafter the Special Sale Officer disposed EP 45/09 on 29.10.2010 and directed to remit Rs.2,000/- per month till discharging the whole liabilities in the loan account. Subsequently a DD for Rs.10,100/- was received at the office of opposite party on 25.2.2011. The same was submitted for encashment. Since the particular loan account was a long pending matter, the society closed the loan account of Sri. Shaji on 7.3.2011 crediting the whole amount received as on date without recovering penal interest, miscellaneous expenses and court expenses etc. A considerable portion of dues was exempted from liability as a grace to the principle debtor. The recovery from the month of March 2011 was stopped since the loan account was closed on 7.3.2011. The opposite party has acted according to the provisions of law and hence there is no deficiency in service on his part.
4. The version of the 3rd opposite party is as follows:-
Vide order No. EP45/09 dated 29.10.2010 of special Sale Officer, Postal, Telecom, BSNL Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No.1940, Trivandrum, it was ordered to Postmaster Thiruvalla HO to attach an amount of Rs.2,000/- per month from the salary of Sri. Reghunadhan, SPM, Veliyanad. Recovery was started by the Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO from the month of November 2010 and continued till February 2011. The recovery schedule forwarded by the Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO to Postal, Telecom, BSNL Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No.1940, Trivandrum from November 2010 to February 2011 submitted. As per letter No.1867/2010-11 dated 11.03.2011 of Postal, Telecom, BSNL Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No.1940, Trivandrum. Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO was instructed to stop the salary recovery as the loan account had finally been settled. On 25.08.2011, a complaint was received by the Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO from Sri.Reghunadhan stating that his case was settled in February 2011 and the salary recovery of Rs.2000/- in the month of February was not in order and the amount should be refunded. Relying on this a letter was sent by the Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO on 6.9.2011 to the Secretary Postal, Telecom, BSNL Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No.1940, Trivandrum requesting to refund the excess credited amount. In the reply received from BSNL authorities vide letter No.BL.2235/1-02 dated 15.09.2011 it was mentioned that Rs.4000/- was seen accumulated towards excess recovery and would be paid back on personal request from the official to the Secretary. Based on this, a letter was written by Postmaster, Thiruvalla HO to Sri. Reghunadhan on 23.09.2016 advising him to request directly to the Secretary, Postal, Telecom, BSNL Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No. 1940, Trivandrum. Hence it is stated that no official at Thiruvalla HO/Thiruvalla Postal Division is at fault.
5. The complainant was examined as PW1. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A10. Documents produced were marked as Exts.B1 to B10.
6. Points for consideration are :-
1) Whether the complaint is maintainable?
2) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
3) If so the reliefs and costs.
7. It is an admitted fact that the first opposite party granted loan of Rs.25,000/- to Mr. P.N. Shaji on the strength of sureties including the complainant. It is also an admitted fact that an amount of Rs.2,000/- recovered from the salary of the complainant. According to the complainant the matter was settled on 22.2.2011. The main allegation of the complainant is that even though the matter was settled and the loan account was closed, an amount of Rs.2,000/- recovered from his salary during the month of February, 2011. The complaint is filed for getting the excess amount recovered by the opposite parties. Hence the complainant is a consumer and complaint is maintainable. In the reply statement filed by the opposite parties, it is admitted that as per the letter No. 1867/2010-11 dated 11.03.2011 of Postal, Telecom, BSNL Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No. 1940, Trivandrum, Post-master, Thiruvalla HO was instructed to stop the salary recovery as the loan account had finally been settled. On 25.08.2011, a complaint was received by the Post-master, Thiruvalla HO from Sri. Reghunadhan stating that his case was settled in February 2011and salary recovery of Rs.2,000/- in the month of February was not in order and the amount should be refunded. Complainant produced a letter dated 8.5.2014 which marked as Ext. A9 issued by the Joint Registrar of the Society of the Asst. Registrar giving direction to give all the benefits deserved by the complainant as per law. It is clear from Ext.A9 that the complainant has deserved some benefits from the opposite parties. Hence the cause of action is continuing and the contention that the complaint is barred by limitation is also no acceptable. In the version filed by the 3rd opposite party it is also admitted that the BSNL Authorities vide letter No. BL2235/1-02 dated 15 9 2011 it is mentioned an amount of Rs.4,000/- was seen accumulated towards excess recovery and would be paid back on the personal requests from the official to the salary. From the admission on the part of the opposite party, it is clear that they are liable to pay Rs.4,000/- to the complainant.
In the result, complaint is allowed. The first opposite party is directed to pay Rs.4,000/- (Rupees four thousand only) with 6% interest from the date of complaint till realization. The first opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of the proceedings to the complainant. The order shall be complied within one month, failing which the first opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.4,000/- with 8% interest from the date of complaint till realization.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of August, 2017.
Sd/-Smt. Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/-Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/-Smt. Jasmine. D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Notice Dtd.21-1-2011
Ext.A2 - Copy of letter dtd. 24-2-2011
Ext.A3 - Copy of letter dtd. 8-3-2011
Ext.A4 - Copy of Notice dtd.31-5-2011
Ext.A5 - Copy of letter dtd. 25-8-2011
Ext.A6 - Copy of letter
Ext.A7 - Copy of letter dtd.10-10-2011
Ext.A8 - Copy of Petition dtd 30-4-2014
Ext.A9 - Copy of letter dtd. 8-5-2014
Ext.A10 - Copy of letter dtd. 25-6-2014.
Evidence of the opposite party:-
Ext.B1 - Registered with A/D dtd/ 29-10-2010.
Ext.B2 - Recovery Schedule dtd. 15-12-2010
Ext.B3 - Recovery Schedule dtd. 10-01-2011
Ext.B4 - Recovery Schedule dtd.12-2-2011
Ext.B5 - Recovery Schedule dtd. 10-3-2011
Ext.B6 - Copy of letter dtd 11-3-2011
Ext.B7 - Copy of letter dtd. 25-8-2011
Ext.B8 - Copy of letter dtd 06-9-2011
Ext.B9 - Copyof letter dtd. 15-9-2011
Ext.B10 - Copy of letter dtd. 23-9-2016.
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:- br/-
Compared by:-
