This is a complaint made by (1) Sri Parimal Das Gupta, son of Late Biraj Mohan Das Gupta and (2) Smt. Aparajita Das Gupta, daughter of Sri Parimal Das Gupta both of 1/43, Sahid Nagar, P.S.-Garfa, Kolkata-700 031 against (a) The Sr. Superintendent of Post Office, South Kolkata Division, Sarat Bose Road, P.S.-Tollygunge, Kolkata-700 029, OP No.1, (b) The Post Master, K. P. Roy Lane (Sub Office), Dhakuria, P.S.-Garfa, Kolkata-700 031, OP No.2, (c) Sri Sekhar Das, Assistant Superintendent of Post Office, South Kolkata Division, Sarat Bose Road, P.S.-Tollygunge, Kolkata-700 029, OP No.3, (d) Sri Subir Das, Post Master of K.P.Roy Lane Sub-Post Office, Dhakuria, P.S.-Garfa, Kolkata-700 031, OP No.4, and (e) Smt. Dolon Basu, office of the Post Office, under South Kolkata Division, Sarat Bose Road, P.S.-Tollygunge, Kolkata-700 029, OP No.5, praying (i) for direction upon the OP No.1 & 2 to pay Rs.6,93,000/- to the Complainant within fifteen days, (ii) for direction upon the OP No.1 & 2 to pay Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony, deficiency in service and harassment, (iii) for direction upon the OP No.3 Sri Sekhar Das to pay Rs.2,00,000/- in his personal capacity for non-cooperation and non-payment of the claim amount to the Complainant, (iv) for direction upon the OP No.4, Sri Subir Das to pay Rs.2,00,000/- in his personal capacity to the Complainant for non-cooperation and for non-payment of the claim amount to the complainants and (v) for direction upon the OP No.5 Dolon Basu to pay Rs.1,00,000/-  in her personal capacity for non-cooperation and non-payment of the claim amount to the Complainant and (vi) for direction upon the OP No.1 & 2 to pay Rs.70,000/- as litigation cost.

         Facts in brief are that Complainant along with Lotika Roy Chowdhury opened an M.I.S. (monthly income scheme) for Rs.3,00,000/- on 21.4.2005, bearing A/C No.3367944, Sub-Post office, K.P.Roy Lane, Tollygunge, South Kolkata Division Post Office, under Garfa P.S., Kolkata-700 031.

              One of the account holders viz. Latika Roy Chowdhury died on 21.4.2012 leaving behind her sister and brothers viz. Mukul Roy, Kamal Kumar Das Gupta, Subimal Das Gupta, Pannalal Das Gupta, Jyotirmoy Das Gupta and Ramlal Das Gupta. After the death of Latika Roy Chowdhury they lodged a written complaint in connection with the M.I.S. account for stopping its operation. Thereafter, the dispute between them were settled and accordingly Kamal Das Gupta, Submial Das Gupta and Pannalal Das Gupta wrote a letter on 15.1.2016 to the OP No.1 & 2, wherein they withdrew the written objection and expressed their no-objection in operation of M.I.S. account by the account holders viz. Parimal Das Gupta and Aparajita Das Gupta. Complainants also wrote a letter on 21.3.2016 to the OP No.1 & 2, wherein they requested OP No.1 & 2 to hand over the entire amount of Rs.6,93,000/- in favour of the Complainants. But OP No.1 & 2 duly represented by Op No.3, 4 & 5 failed and neglected to handover the entire amount in favour of the Complainants. Complainants further wrote a letter on 20.4.2016 to the OP No.1 & 2, wherein they requested OP No.1 & 2 to handover the entire amount in favour of the Cmplainants. But, OP No.1 & 2 failed and neglected to handover the entire amount. On 13.5.2016 the Complainants went to meet with the OP No.4 Sri Subir Das at K.P.Roy lane Sub-Post Office. OP No.4 told the Complainants that he is unable to pay the amount in favour of the Complainants unless he gets order from the OP No.1, 3 & 5.

            On 16.5.2016 Complainants went to meet with the OP No.1,  3 & 5 and informed the decision of the OP No.4. After hearing the Complainants, OP No.3 & 5 told that the entire amount is lying with the OP No.2 & 4. Therefore, it is the duty of OP No.2 & 4 to disburse the entire amount in favour of the Complainants. On that date Complainants went again to the OP No.2 & 4. But, they refused to disburse the amount. Thereafter, Complainants moved hither and thither for getting the amount. OP No.3, 4 & 5 did not take the matter seriously to solve the dispute. Both the Complainants suffered mental agony from the two officers i.e. Sekhar Das and Subir Das. OP No.1 & 2 both are guilty of doing unfair trade practice and also guilty of deficiency in services. OP No.1 & 2 are bound to pay compensation and litigation cost. So, Complainants filed this complaint.

            OP No.1 to 5 filed written version and denied all the allegations of the complaint. They have further stated that Parimal Dasgupta along with Latika Roy Chowdhury and Aparajita Dasgupta opened an MIS account being No.3367944 for Rs.3,00,000/- at K.P.Roy  Lane, Post Office – OP No.2. Said  Latika Roy Chowdhury died on 21.4.2012 leaving behind her sisters and brothers. After the demise of Latika Roy Chowdhury her legal heirs, through their Advocate, sent a letter to the OP No.2 on 27.11.2015 mentioning that they have already filed Misc. Case bearing No.18119 of 2011 and also filed one probate case before the Ld. District Judge, Alipore, in connection with the above mentioned deposits. After receiving this letter OP took proper steps and sent reply through Advocate. They also stated that the payment may be made as per rules. The OP always remain willing to pay the amount to the bona fide heirs. But, due to dispute between the heirs the delay was caused. So, they prayed for dismissal of this case.

Decision with reasons

              Complainant filed a petition praying for treating the complaint application as evidence.

              Main point for determination is whether the Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed in the complaint petition.

            In the present case Sri Parimal Dasgupta and Aparajita Dasgupta are the Complainants and their contention is that they had an MIS Account  with Latika Roy Chowdhury in the post office. Since Latika Roy Chowdhury died they made a demand for the amount lying in the account. But, other  heirs made an objection to the post office for not passing the amount. They stated that since they have filed a Misc. Case and a probate case, the money should not be paid to Parimal Dasgupta and Aparajita Dasgupta. Accordingly, OPs acted and replied to the letter of the sisters and brothers of Latika Roy Chowdhury. But, subsequently, the matter was settled between the sisters and brothers, and, thereafter, the OPs Post Office disbursed the money to the Complainants. It could be possible because other heirs who raised objection wrote to the post office and the officers that they do not have objection if the amount is paid to the Complainants.

At the time of argument Ld. Advocates for both the sides conceded that OPs disbursed the amount in favour of the Complainants when the dispute among the brothers and sisters of Latika Roy Chowdhury was resolved.

Now, the allegations of Complainants is that OP No.1, 2 & 3 harassed them and so they must pay penalty for the fact that they indulged in unfair trade practice. It appears that the payment was obstructed by the brothers and sisters of the deceased and for that Complainant could not get payment which they ought to have received within time. Had the brothers and sisters of Latika Roy Chowdhury not obstructed, the delay would not have been caused and the matter would have been solved easily.

Now, Complainants have prayed for Rs.1,00,000/- against OP No.5 and Rs.2,00,000/- against OP No.4 as compensation for harassment. Further, they have asked for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- against OP No.3. These compensations have been demanded in the personal capacity. So far as this Forum is concerned, it does not have any jurisdiction to allow any compensation of any amount if it is sought in the personal capacity. It is because Forums have been constituted for deficiency in services and for unfair trade practice. If OP No.3, 4 & 5 are employees of post office, the question of unfair trade practice will arise when the allegation is otherwise.

Accordingly, we are of the view that there is no ground to ask OP No.3, 4 & 5 to pay any compensation to the Complainants.

            Similarly, Complainants have prayed Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation. As earlier stated since the dispute arose due to objection raised by sisters and brothers of Latika Roy Chowdhury and so Complainants could not get their MIS money there is no ground to award any compensation.

            Opposite parties have already paid due money i.e. Rs.6,93,000/- to the Complainants.

            As such, we are of the view that the dispute has already been resolved and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

            Hence ,

ordered

            CC/245/2016 and the same is dismissed on contest.