Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/85/2015

M/s.Sandeep.S.Shah.Huf - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Sub posrmaster - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Samir S Shah

27 Sep 2017

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  30.04.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on:  27.09.2017

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

        PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    THIRU. M.UYIRROLI KANNAN B.B.A., B.L.,      MEMBER - I

 

                                WEDNESDY  THE 27^th   DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017

  C.C.NO.85/2015

 

Sandeep.S.Shah.Huf,

Represented  by Karta,

Sandeep.S.Shah.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

1.The Sub-Postmaster,

High Court Building, Post Office,

Chennai – 600 104.

 

2.The Chief Post Master,

Chennai. G.P.O.Rajaji Salai,

G.T.Chennai – 600 001.

 

3.The Senior Superintendent of Post Office,

Chennai City North Division,

Chennai – 600 008.

 

4.The Director – General,

Department of Posts,

M/o communication and IT,

Dak bhawan sansad marg,

New Delhi.

 

.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                 : 05.06.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : Samir s Shah

Counsel for Opposite Parties                   : Ms.K.Akhilandeshwari A.C.G.S.C

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant to pay  short  fall payment of Rs.3,66,749/- with interest, compensation for mental agony with litigation expenses u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant opened a PPF Account a  bearing No.1002396 with the 2^nd Opposite Party and subsequently the said account was transferred to 1^st Opposite Party post office. The said account will be in force for a period of 15 years after the expiry of the period the account holder renewed the same till 31.03.2013. After renewal he made payment on 04.05.09, 01.05.2010, 02.01.2012 and 03.08.2012 at the 1^st Opposite Party office and entry was also updated including interest.

          2.All of a sudden on 15.10.2012, the Complainant received a letter dated 11.10.2012 addressed by the first Opposite Party herein asking the Complainant to close down the above-mentioned PPF account in view of the ministries notification No.956 (E) dated 07.12.2010.  Immediately on receipt of the said letter the Complainant herein addressed a letter dated 25.10.2012 to the first Opposite Party to furnish circular of the government so as to enable the Complainant to question the same before the competent court. The 1^st Opposite Party did not furnish the circular; hence the Complainant has taken that as no such circular.

          3.As the account was renewed till 31.03.2013, on 06.04.2013 the Complainant approached the 1^st Opposite Party to close the account. On 01.05.2013 the Complainant received information on his mobile that the cheque is ready towards closure of his account. Accordingly on 03.05.2013 Karta of the Complainant herein went to the post office to collect the cheque. At that point of time first Opposite Party herein gave a cheque for Rs.19,68,696/- as against the accounting entry made in the PPF passbook to a tune of Rs.25,35,445/- and thus made a short payment to the tune of Rs.3,66,749/-. When Karta of the Complainant herein enquired about such short fall in the amount, it was told that Complainant will not be entitled to any interest on the amount standing to the credit of the PPF account from 01.04.2011 onwards. The Complainant had no other option but to receive the cheque for a lesser amount by making appropriate endorsement. Immediately after receiving the amount under protest on 13.05.2013, the Complainant addressed a letter to the first Opposite Party herein complaining about incomplete payment and there was no reply which compelled the Complainant to issue an advocate notice dated 06.11.2013addressed to the third Opposite Party herein as well as to the first Opposite Party herein and also marking copy to the fourth Opposite Party.

          4. As per the notification it appears that instruction is given to all the concerned post office to close such account on 31.03.2011 and the entire amount standing to the credit of the subscriber shall be refunded. In view of such direction being given it is the bounden duty of the concerned post office to inform individually to all the account holder and refund the amount standing to the credit of the in account which has not been done in the present case. The Opposite Parties 1&2 have not only received the amount from the Complainant but have also utilized that amount as well as the amount which was already available to the credit of the said account and having done so on principles of natural justice they are liable to pay the interest to the Complainant. Therefore, it is clear that the Opposite Parties have committed deficiency in service and thereby caused mental agony to him. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint to pay  short  fall payment of Rs.3,66,749/- with interest, compensation for mental agony with litigation expenses.

5. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  OPPOSITE PARTIES IN BRIEF:

          The Opposite Parties admits that the Complainant was holding a PPF HUF account in the capacity of Karta. AS per Gazette Notification No.GSR No.291(E) dt. 13.05.2005 circulated vide SB order No.10/2004 dt.23.06.2005 and again vide Gazette Notification No.G.S.R.956 (E) dt. 7^th December 2010 it was clarified that the PPF accounts opened in the name of HUF prior to 13.05.2005 but have already been matured and not yet closed shall be closed on 31.03.2011 after which no further interest shall be admissible. Accordingly, the said account being a PPF-HUF account is not eligible for extension beyond maturity and the same has been done irregularly.  The letter dt.22.09.2012 has been addressed to the 2^nd Opposite Party which is Chennai GPO, the account office. On receipt of intimation from GPO, the date of credit was noted as 06.08.2012 of Chennai GPO, the date of credit was corrected as 03.08.2012. The Complainant has himself agreed that his account is subject to audit by his auditor which implies that the Complainant should be aware of the G.O on discontinuance of investment  by HUF in post offices and that the accounts standing in the name of HUF will only be allowed until its maturity and cannot be extended.

6. The Complainant has purportedly misused the post office to gain higher rate of interest and to deceive the I.T. Department. Due reply was given to the Complainant by the Opposite Party vide letter No.SB/PC-Misc Dlgs 16/12-13 dated 14/19.11.2013. The 1^st Opposite Party – High Court Building is only a sub office in account with Chennai GPO. As per rules, PPF accounts can be closed only after sanctioning in by the Account Office. Accordingly, on receipt of sanction on 29.04.2013 the Complainant had been informed for attending the office to take payment. On 03.05.2013 when the Complainant attended the post office, account was closed and payment with eligible interest was made. The deposits made irregularly will not carry interest. Therefore the Opposite Parties have not committed deficiency in service and prays to dismiss the Complaint with costs.

7. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

8. POINT NO :1 

           The admitted facts are that the complainant opened a PPF Account with the 2^nd opposite party on 29.03.1993  with an account No.1002396 for a period of 15 years  and subsequently the said account was transferred to the 1^st opposite party  office  and the new account number was assigned as 1015236 by the 1^st opposite party with an option to renew the said account for a further period of 5 years and accordingly the said account was renewed till 31.03.2013 and thereafter the complainant also made deposits on various dates like 04.05.2009, 01.05.2010, 02.01.2012 and 03.08.2012 to the 1^st opposite party and Ex.A1 is the PPF pass book of the complainant and the complainant requested the 1^st opposite party to close his account on 06.04.2013.

          9. The complainant alleged deficiency against the opposite parties is that his  PPF account book balance was Rs.25,35,445/- and whereas the 1^st opposite party gave a cheque for Rs.19,68,696/- with a short payment of Rs.3,66,749/-  and  he had no knowledge about the notification dated 07.12.2010 issued by the government and further the opposite parties only renewed his account and hence he is entitled for interest till closure of the account and therefore the complainant is entitled for the relief sought by him.

          10. The opposite parties would contend that as per notification, the amount disbursed to the complainant is correct and further the book balance is only Rs.23,35,445/-  and after allowing interest of Rs.3,22,498/-till 31.03.2011,  out of the total interest of Rs.6,89,247/- the 1^st opposite party had rightly paid a sum of Rs.19,68,696/- to the complainant in accordance with notification dated 07.12.2010 and further the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission , Chandigarh reported in (IV (2014) CPJ 30(Punj)) upheld the notification and therefore the complainant is not entitled for any relief sought by him in the complaint.

          11. The complainant averred the book balance is Rs.25,35,445/-. Whereas in Ex.A1 PPF book of the complainant, the book balance mentioned as Rs.23,35,445/-. Therefore the book balance pleaded in the complaint is not a correct amount. The complainant referred an order of this Forum passed in CC No. 184/2014 dated 22.09.2015 and as per that order he is entitled for the reliefs prayed by him. The facts in CC 184/2014 is that after seeing the notification dated 07.12.2013, the complainant himself approached the post office  and requested their official to close his PPF account in view of the aforesaid notification and the said request was rejected by the officials of the post office and therefore in such circumstances that compliant was allowed.        Whereas in the case in hand the facts are differs and  therefore the view taken by us in CC No.184/2014 do not applicable to the facts of the case in hand.

          12. The Punjab State Commission clearly held in its order reported in IV (2014) CPJ 30(Punj) that the notification is a notice to the general public and excuse of this point of law cannot be entertained by them and upheld the said notification dated 07.12.2010. There is no contra order shown by the complainant for the decision of the Punjab State Commission. Therefore we are bound by the order of the Punjab State Commission. In the said notification, it has been clearly said that after 15 years the existing account shall be closed at the end of the financial current year, i.e.  on the 31^st day of March, 2011. In this case also the 1^st opposite party arrived the eligible amount to the complainant in Ex.A1, PPF account book for a sum of Rs.19,68,696/-  and the said amount was also received by him and therefore we find there is no deficiency on the part of the opposite parties and accordingly we hold that the opposite parties 1 to 4 have not committed any deficiency in service.    

13. POINT NO:2

Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 27^th day of September 2017.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 29.03.1993                   P.P.F. Pass Book

Ex.A2 dated 22.09.2012                   Letter from Complainant to Opposite Party No.2

Ex.A3 dated 11.10.2012                   Letter from Opposite Party No.1 to Complainant

Ex.A4 dated 25.10.2012                   Letter from Complainant to Opposite Party No.1

Ex.A5 dated 01.11.2012                   Letter from Opposite Party No.1 to Opposite Party

                                                    No.3 – copy to Complainant

Ex.A6 dated 13.05.2013                   Letter from Complainant to Opposite Party No.1

Ex.A7 dated 28.05.2013                   R Net Tracking

Ex.A8 dated 06.11.2013                   Advocate Notice to all the Opposite Parties with

                                                    Ack.Cards.

Ex.A9 dated 14.11.2013                   Letter from Opposite Party No.3 to Advocate of

                                                    the Complainant

Ex.A10 dated 23.12.2013                 Letter from Advocate of the Complainant to

                                                    Opposite Party No.3

Ex.A11 dated 07.01.2014                 Letter from Ministry of finance to Advocate of the

                                                    Complainant along with 4 enclosures

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES :

 

Ex.A1 dated 13.05.2005                   Copy of Gazette Notification No.GSR 291(E)

Ex.A2 dated 07.12.2010                   Copy of Gazette Notification No.GSR 956(E)

Ex.A3 dated 23.03.1993                   Copy of SB-3 Card, original application for

                                                    opening of the PPF-HUF account no 1015236

Ex.A4 dated 03.05.2013                   Copy of Closure voucher

 

 

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT