Consumer Complaint No. 161 of 2015
Date of filing: 31.7.2015 Date of disposal: 06.9.2016
Complainant: Sri Ashoke Goswami, S/o. Late Radhakrishna Goswami, Village: Sripur Goswamipara, Post Office: Sripur, Police Station: Jamuria, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 373.
-V E R S U S-
Opposite Party: 1. The Sub-Post Master, Sripur Bazar Post Office, PO: Sripur, PS: Jamuria, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 373.
2. The Senior Superintendent, Asansol Head Post Office, Asansol Division, PO: Asansol, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 301.
3. Avijit Dey, Inspector, Asansol Head Post Office, Asansol Division, PO: Asansol, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 301.
Present: Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kumar Mandal.
Hon’ble Member: Smt. Silpi Majumder.
Hon’ble Member: Sri Pankaj Kumar Sinha.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate, Sougata Dey.
Appeared for the Opposite Party: Ld. Advocate, Murari Mohan Kumar.
J U D G E M E N T
The complainant is a retired E.C.L. employee. After retirement he opened a Senior Citizen Savings Scheme (SCSS) with the office of the OP-1 by depositing Rs. 4,00,000=00 where he was assured to get interest @9% per annum and he urged for withdrawing interest quarterly. Accordingly the complainant was issued a SCSS A/c. No. 0250002, dated 28.7.2005, maturity date of which was 28.07.2010 i.e. after 5 years from the date of issuance. After opening the said account the complainant used to withdraw interest quarterly @9% per annum, the months being March, June, September & December of each financial year. On the date of maturity i.e. on 28.07.2010 the complainant applied before the OP-1 for extension of the said account and the OP-1 on the same day extended the said account by endorsing his signature in the pass book bearing his official rubber seal and also endorsed “continued” without mentioning the further date of maturity of the extended period. Though the OP-1 verbally disclosed that the said account will be matured after 5 years i.e. on 28.7.2015 and he will be entitled to receive the same rate of interest i.e. 9% per annum till the date of further maturity of the extended period verbally told as up to 28.07.2015. Thereafter, the OP-1 paid interest quarterly @9000=00 for 4½ years after the initial date of maturity i.e. for the period from 28.07.2010 to 31.12.2014 and the last date of payment of interest was 31st December, 2014. On 31.03.2015 when the complainant went to withdraw the quarterly interest, the OP-1 denied giving any interest to him. On being asked, the OP-1 disclosed that his account had initially matured on 28.07.2010 and after subsequent extension to the period of maturity of three years from that date, i.e. date of further maturity for the extended period ought to have been 28.07.2013. The OP-1 further disclosed that the interest paid from the period 28.7.2013 to 31.12.2014 have erroneously been given 9% interest per annum, so that an excess amount of Rs. 30,000=00 has been paid to the complainant for six quarters i.e. from the period 28.07.2013 to 31.12.2014 amounting to approximately Rs. 30,000=00 would be deducted from the principal amount and after deduction the balance amount would be refunded to the complainant. The complainant was shocked to receive such intimation and asked the OP-1 the reasons why the same was not intimated to him on 28.7.2013 and on the verge of extended period of maturity i.e. 28.07.2015, the same has been disclosed. There was no satisfactory explanation from the OP-1. Although, the OP-1 had admitted that the rule was not known to him and he has done the same by mistake for a continued period of six quarter i.e. 1½ years. Thereafter several grievances have been lodged by the complainant before the OP-1 & OP-2 but the complainant got no redress for his grievance from the OP-1 & OP-2. Getting no redress from the OP-1 & OP-2, the complainant has been compelled to file this case before this ld. Forum. Hence, the case arose.
Notices were served upon the Ops. OP-2 contested the case by filing written version on behalf of OP-1 & OP-3 also. In its written version the OP-1 has admitted the payment of quarterly interest @9,000=00 for 4½ years which were made after initial deposit up to 31.12.2014 but the allegation about the claim of interest on 31.3.2015 for the denial of the OP-1 on the plea that the extension beyond 3 years from the last maturity date of earlier one was unsustainable i.e. the claimant/complainant is not entitled to get interest up to 28.7.2015 and money paid to the complainant is worthy to be deducted. The OP-2 also admitted that the same was not disclosed earlier and the OP-1 disclosed about his ignorance about the rule of extension for another three years after the initial deposit for 5 years. The OP-2 stated in its written version that during the time of initial deposit on 28.07.2005, the complainant duly filled up Form “A”, a prescribed form under the Postal rule related to SCSS and thereby the complainant undertook to abide by the said rules duly signed by him. The said deposit as per rule matured on 28.07.2010 and as per terms of deposit the complainant was paid quarterly an amount of Rs. 9,000=00 towards the accrued interest regularly and up to the date of maturity, there was no problem. After maturity the complainant applied for extension of the tenure of the deposit again by filling an application in form “B” prescribed by the said rule of the Scheme which consists terms and conditions of such extension which includes inter alia that the subsequent extension will be for a further period of three years from the date of maturity of the first deposit. The date of maturity of the initial deposit was 28.07.2010 i.e. the complainant would be entitled to get interest @9% quarterly up to 28.07.2013. Therefore, the complainant should pay back the excess amount of interest paid in his favour after 28.07.2013. The OP-2 stated that the complainant has received interest for six quarters after the said date of maturity i.e. 28.07.2013 to 31.12.2014. As per the said rule in terms of 18 provides the said period of extension of the deposit account and specifically prescribes that after maturity of the initial deposit the account will be closed after three years only i.e. extension of deposit of the complainant was valid up to 27.07.2013. So the complainant has withdrawn fraudulently the accrued interest up to 31.12.2014. Thus appropriated an excess amount of interest beyond the date of maturity of complainant’s due extended period, which as liable to be adjusted with the complainant’s principal dues towards the deposit and that is why a cheque for Rs. 3, 74,000=00 being cheque No. 109812, dated 06.4.2015 has been issued in favour of the complainant for final settlement of the complainant’s claim. Unfortunately, the complainant refused to accept the cheque with a view to earn undue gain. The OP-2 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Decision with reasons:-
The complainant applied before the OP-1 on 28.7.2010 on which the date of maturity date of the initial deposit for extension of his account and the OP-1 on the same date extended the said account by endorsing his signature in the pass book putting his official rubber seal and also endorsed “continued” without mentioning the further date of maturity of the extended period and the complainant was verbally informed by the OP-1, the said account would continue for another 5 years i.e. on 28.7.2015. Therefore, the complainant is certainly entitled to receive the same rate of interest i.e. @9% per annum till date of further maturity of the extended period. Subsequently, the complainant was regularly paid quarterly interest @9,000=00 for 4½ years after the initial date of maturity i.e. for the period from 28.7.2010 to 31.12.2014. But on 31.3.2015 the complainant was denied to give any interest. He was informed by the OP-1 that the interest paid from 28.7.2013 to 31.3.2014 has been erroneously given @9% per annum instead of interest rate of Post Office Savings Bank account by the OP-1 as his deposit has been closed on 28.7.2013 i.e. the date of further maturity has been extended for only three years from the date of first date of maturity. The OP-1 also admitted that the rule was not known to him and he has done the same, i.e., paying interest @9,000=00 after 28.7.2013 by mistake for a continuous period of six quarter i.e. for 1½ years i.e. the complainant has been victim of the gross mistake done by the OP-1 for which he is liable to get the entire amount, not deducting anything from his account. During argument the OP raised the point relating to the rules of SCSS for which as per their argument the complainant has to file the form ‘A’ for his initial deposit on 28.7.2005. On subsequent extension of further period, the complainant should fill up the form ‘B’, application for extension of an account under SCSS, 2004 where the complainant may apply for continuation of the account under the SCSS, 2004 for a further period of three years from the date of maturity of his initial account i.e. the complainant has certainly filled up the form ‘B’ for which he has applied for extension of another three years. The complainant argued to produce the said relevant form ‘B’ where he has applied for extension of his initial account but the OP-1 has failed to produce the relevant form ‘B’ even after repeated order of this Ld. Forum. The complainant argued that actually the instruction has not been given to file the filled up form ‘B’ for extension of his initial account but the official of the OP-1 has extended his account by endorsing his signature in the pass book bearing his official rubber seal and also endorsed “continued” without mentioning the further date of maturity of the extended period.
Perusing all the documents and hearing the argument at length, we are of the opinion that paying interest after 28.7.2013 @9% per annum quarterly is solely the laches of the official of the Op which has been admitted by the OP-2 during argument. The OP-1 further admitted that the rule was not known to him and that is why, he has done the mistake for continuous period of six quarters i.e. for 1½ years. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get his grievance redressed due to laches on the part of the officials of the OP. As the complainant, being a senior citizen has been harassed by the negligence on the part of the official of the OP-2, the complainant is entitled to get compensation. As the complainant has been compelled to come before this Forum, he is entitled to get litigation cost. The complainant has got interest Rs. 9,000=00 quarterly @9% per annum up to 31.12.2014. The conflict has arisen on 31.3.2015. So the complainant is entitled to get Rs. 9,000=00 for the period from 01.01.2015 to 31.3.2015.
Fees paid is correct.
Hence, it is
O r d e r e d
that the complainant is allowed on contest and the OP-2 is directed to pay back (i) Rs. 4, 00,000=00 as initial deposit by the complainant under SCS Scheme and Rs. 9,000=00 as quarterly interest due from 01.01.2015 to 31.3.2015 along with an interest @9% per annum on both the amounts (Rs. 4,00,000 + Rs. 9,000) from 01.4.2015 within 45 days from the date of passing of this award, in default, the OP-2 is directed to pay penal interest @10% on the amount i.e. Rs. 4,09,000=00 till the date of realization, (ii) Rs. 2,000=00 as compensation for harassment, mental agony and pain and (iii) Rs. 1,000=00 as litigation cost within 45 days from the date of passing of this award, failing which, the complainant will be at liberty to put the entire award in execution as per provisions of law.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions of law.
