Orissa

Rayagada

CC/82/2018

Jayanti Prusti - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Sr. Superintendent of Post Office - Opp.Party(s)

Sri L.M Patnial

05 Feb 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 82 / 2018.                                            Date.      8   .     2  . 2019

 

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                          President.

Sri  Gadadhara  Sahu,                                           Member.

Smt. Padmalaya  Mishra,                                     Member.

 

            Smt. Jayanti Prusti, W/O: Prasana Kumar Prusty, Vill/ Po:Kailashpur,                Dist:Rayagada         (Odisha)                                            …. Complainant.

            Versus.

            1.The Sr. Superintendent of Post office, Koraput Division, Jeypore, Dist:Koraput.

            2.The Post Master, Head post office,  Po/ Dist: Rayagada.

            3.The Sub-Post Master, Ramanaguda S.O., Ramanaguda.

            4. The Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Rayagada Branch, Rayagada.

……...Opp.Parties

For the Complainant:-Self..

For the O.P No.1 to 3  :-  In  person.

For the O.P. No.4:- Set exparte.

 

.                                                           JUDGEMENT

The  curx of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for  non credit  of  postal cheque in the Bank S.B. account  pass book    for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

On being Noticed to the O.Ps the O.P. No.1 appeared  in person before the forum  and stated that being the operational head of Koraput postal Division is competent  to file the reply on behalf of  O.P. No.1 to 3     inter alia filed   written  version refuting the allegation made against them. The O.Ps 1 to 3 taking one and other pleas in the written version   sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable  under the C.P. Act, 1986. The facts which are not specifically admitted may be treated  as denial of the O.Ps 1 to 3. Hence the O.Ps 1 to 3 prays the forum to dismiss the case against  them  to meet the ends of justice.

On being noticed  the O.P  No. 4   neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  07 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.P No.4 .  Observing lapses of around 8 months  for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing from  the  complainant set the case  exparte against the O.P. No.4. The action of the O.P No. 4  is against the principles of  natural justice as envisaged  under section  13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.P. No.4  set exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.

The O.Ps 1 to 3  appeared and filed their written version.  Heard arguments from the    O.Ps 1 to 3  and from the complainant.    Perused the record, documents, written version  filed by the parties. 

This forum  examined the entire material on record  and given  a thoughtful consideration  to the  arguments  advanced  before us by  the  parties & vehemently opposed the complaint touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

                                       

                                        FINDINGS.

Undisputedly the complainant had opened one RD account at Rayagada Head post office. On maturity of the said R.D. account the Post master,  Head post office, Rayagada  effected payment of the accrued  value to the depositor vide his cheque No. 000134 Dt. 262.2.2018 for Rs.74,651/- payable in Allahabad Bank, Nayapalli,Bhubaneswar. But the  B.M., Nayapalli Allahabad bank has returned the cheque citing insufficient funds in the account with a direction to the complainant to contact drawer bank and to present the same again.  Hence this C.C. case.

The O.Ps 1 to 3 in their written version submitted that  the Chief Manager, SBI, Rayagada vide his E-mail message Dtd. 30^th. August, 2018 has requested the B.M., Allahabad Bank, Rayagada Branch to present the cheque again for payment. The B.M., SBI, Rayagada vide his E-mail  message dtd. 31^st. August, 2018 has intimated regarding payment of the cheque No. 000134 Dtd. 26.2.2018 for Rs. 74,651.00 on Dt. 31.8.2018.  The Post Master, Rayagada, Head post office vide his E-mail message DTd. 4.9.2018 has confirmed that as per the bank scroll No. 83 Dt. 31.8.2018.  The value of cheque No. 134 Dt. 26.2.2018  for Rs.74,651.00 has been credited to the S.B. account of the complainant on Dt. 30.8.2018.

The grievance of the complainant was considered by the O.P. No.2 and  have credited a sum of  Rs.74,651/-  to the complainant’s S.B. account on Dt.30.8.2018 (Copies of the correspondence between the banks  are in the file marked as Annexure-I & No.2).

 The O.Ps are committed to the  service  of the public and the O.Ps have acceded to the relief  claimed by the complainant  expeditiously within  their limits being duty  bound  and there is no deficiency in service.

This forum observed the O.Ps. after receipt of notice from the Forum promptly  have credited a sum of  Rs.74,651/-  to the complainant’s S.B. account on Dt.30.8.2018  and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  The present case in hand the complainant is not entitled any compensation from the O.P.

To meet the ends of justice the following order is passed.

ORDER.

Accordingly the case stands disposed off.  There is no order as to cost and compensation.

Dictated and corrected by me.   Pronounced on this      8^th.    day  of   February, 2019.

 

Member.                                   Member.                                           President