Ld Advocates are present. Judgement is ready, it is pronounced in open Commission in 5 pages 3 sheet of papers.

BY -    SRI ASISH DEB, PRESIDENT

Brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the Complainant is a permanent residence within this jurisdiction. The Complainant opened a Postal Recurring Account of Rs. 1,000/- (One Thousand) per month for five years. The said Account being No. 6184359925 at Kismat Bajkul Post Office which was started from 29/12/2018 through the postal agent of this Kismat Bajkul Post Office namely Dipali Samonta, D/O- late Nipati Samonta and also continued to deposit Rs.1,000/- per month up-to December 2020. The Complainant deposited on this account on 20/12/2020 for the last after that unfortunately the Complainant came to know that the said agent namely Dipali Samonta skedaddle from the said Bajkul Post Office. The Complainant knowing this verified this Recurring passbook by the post Master of the Bajkul Post office and came to know that the account was already stopped and the official account balance is 16,000/- (Sixteen Thousand)_when the Passbook balance shows Rs.25,000/-. The complainant came to know that the said agent also cheated other persons. The Complainant also informed his recurring account status to the Post master of the said Bajkul Post Office by hand and to the Superintendent of Post Offices of Tamluk Division at Tamluk through a registered letter that OPs No.1 & 2 did not pay said amount to the Complainant till now. The Complainant demanded the said deposit amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty-Five Thousand). The Complainant has been suffering from mental agony. The ops committed deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practices with the complainant. The complainant is entitled to get the deposit amount of the Recurring Passbook which the O.P. authority received along with the compensation for the mental pain, agony, and suffering and loss of income apart from the interest. The cause of action of this case originally has arisen on 19.03.2021. The complainant has prayed for directing the ops to pay the said deposit amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with 10% interest from 19.10.2018 to the complainant till realization to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to the Complainant for mental agony to pay the litigation cost of Rs, 10,000/- to the Complainant for conduct of this case and to give other relief to the Complainant which the Commission may deem fit and proper.

Notices were duly served upon the ops calling upon them to answer the complaint. The ops have resisted the claims of the complainant by filing a written version thereto. Succinctly, put the contentions made can be delineated as follows: The OPs denied all the allegations contained in the complaint para wise  except those are specifically admitted in this written version or otherwise dealt with, and added that nothing stated in the complaint should be deemed to be admitted merely because the same is not specifically traversed. According to ops one Five years Recurring Deposit A/C bearing No.6184359925 (Old Account No. 1410877) was opened at Kismate Bajkul sub Post Office in account with Tamluk Head Post Office and Tamluk Division in the name of Sri Uday Sankar Mahapatra of Vill. & P.O. Garbari, Dist.-Purba Medinipur on 29.12.2018 with denomination of Rs. 1,000/- (One Thousand only) per month initially. As per office record monthly installments were deposited in the said account up to March 2020 with balance Rs. 16,000/- (Sixteen Thousand Rupees only) which appears to be agreed with the balance of the passbook up to March 2020 as prima facie reveals from the photocopy of the passbook of the concerned account received along with the complaint application of the complainant vide DCDRF Purba Medinipur Consumer Case NO. 80/2022. It prima facie reveals from the said photocopy of the passbook of the said Recurring Deposit account that monthly installments at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- for the month of April 2020, May 2020, June 2020, July 2020, August 2020 & September 2020 to October 2020 have been entered in the passbook on 27.04.2020, 08.05.2020, 08.06.2020, 09.07.2020, 28.08.2020 & 30.10.2020 respectively with illegible impression of date stamp and initial made against each entry of those transactions by which balance in the passbook appears to come of Rs. 23,000(Twenty Three thousand only) up to October 2020. Another monthly installments at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- for the month of November 20 and December 20 are found entered in the passbook as per said copy of the passbook of the said account on 11.11.2020 and 12.2020 (date no mentioned therein) with initial, made against each entry of transactions and accordingly balance has been drawn up as Rs. 25,000/- in the passbook up to December 20, but no impression of date stamp has been put against the transaction of Nov. 20 and December 20 for authentication. The transaction entered in the Passbook for the month of April 2020 to December 2020 appear not to be reflected in the system generated finale ledger of the said account (ledger copy is annexed hereto and marked as R-1). The Complainant has not preferred any claim in prescribed claim application along with original passbook of account No. 6184359925 (Old Account No. 1410877) and relevant papers for payment of justified defrauded money if any misappropriated in the said account till date. On receipt at prescribed claim application alongwith original passbook and relevant papers from the claimant and claim for payment of justified defrauded money if any misappropriate in his recurring deposit account may be sanctioned after observing due formalities. As the complainant have not preferred any claim in prescribed claim application alongwith original pass book and relevant papers for payment of justified defrauded money if any misappropriated in his recurring deposit account till date. So question of payment of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- does not arise. In the above facts and circumstances the Commission would be graciously pleased to dismiss the instant consumer case with cost for unnecessary harassment.

Points for determination are:

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?                                            2.  Is the Complainant entitled to the relief(s) as sought for?

Decision with reasons

Both the points, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion  for sake of brevity and  convenience.

We have carefully perused the complaint on affidavit of the complaint ,written version and evidence produced by Complainant i.e. examination in- chief on affidavit filed by complainant, Questionnaire filed by op-1 and reply there to by the complainant. On appraisal of the materials on records along with bundle of facts it appears that the complainant is a Consumer in respect of the Five years Recurring Deposit A/C bearing No.6184359925 (Old Account No. 1410877) which was opened at Kismate Bajkul sub Post Office in account with Tamluk Head Post Office and Tamluk Division in the name of Sri Uday Sankar Mahapatra of Vill. & P.O. Garbari, Dist.-Purba Medinipur  with the O.Ps. The case is maintainable in its present form and in law.

Now, on scanning the evidence, it appears that the complainant has stated on oath that the Complainant opened a Postal Recurring Account of Rs. 1,000/- (One Thousand) per month for five years. The said Account being No. 6184359925 at Kismat Bajkul Post Office which was started from 29/12/2018 through the postal agent of this Kismat Bajkul Post Office namely Dipali Samonta, D/O- late Nipati Samonta and also continued to deposit Rs.1,000/- per month up-to December 2020. The Complainant deposited on this account on 20/12/2020 for the last after that unfortunately the Complainant came to know that the said agent namely Dipali Samonta skedaddle from the said Bajkul Post Office. The Complainant knowing this verified this Recurring passbook by the post Master of the Bajkul Post office and came to know that the account was already stopped and the official account balance is 16,000/- (Sixteen Thousand)_when the Passbook balance shows Rs.25,000/-. The complainant came to know that the said agent also cheated other persons. The Complainant also informed his recurring account status to the Post master of the said Bajkul Post Office by hand and to the Superintendent of Post Offices of Tamluk Division at Tamluk through a registered letter that OPs No.1 & 2 did not pay said amount to the Complainant till now.

On the other hand it is the case of ops that as per office record monthly installments were deposited in the said account up to March 2020 with balance Rs. 16,000/- (Sixteen Thousand Rupees only) which appears to be agreed with the balance of the passbook up to March 2020 as it prima facie reveals from the photocopy of the passbook of the concerned account received along with the complaint application of the complainant vide DCDRF Purba Medinipur Consumer Case NO. 80/2022. It prima facie reveals from the said photocopy of the passbook of the said Recurring Deposit account that monthly installments at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- for the month of April 2020, May 2020, June 2020, July 2020, August 2020 & September 2020 to October 2020 have been entered in the passbook on 27.04.2020, 08.05.2020, 08.06.2020, 09.07.2020, 28.08.2020 & 30.10.2020 respectively with illegible impression of date stamp and initial made against each entry of those transactions by which balance in the passbook appears to come of Rs. 23,000(Twenty Three thousand only) up to October 2020. Another monthly installments at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- for the month of November 20 and December 20 are found entered in the passbook as per said copy of the passbook of the said account on 11.11.2020 and 12.2020 (date no mentioned therein) with initial, made against each entry of transactions and accordingly balance has been drawn up as Rs. 25,000/- in the passbook up to December 20, but no impression of date stamp has been put against the transaction of Nov. 20 and December 20 for authentication. The transaction entered in the Passbook for the month of April 2020 to December 2020 appear not to be reflected in the system generated finale ledger of the said account .

Now , on evaluation of the evidence on record it appears that there is no dispute that as per office record monthly installments were deposited in the said account up to March 2020 with balance Rs. 16,000/- (Sixteen Thousand Rupees only) which appears to be agreed with the balance of the passbook up to March 2020 .Regarding subsequent deposits it is the defense of the ops are that It prima facie reveals from the said photocopy of the passbook of the said Recurring Deposit account that monthly installments at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- for the month of April 2020, May 2020, June 2020, July 2020, August 2020 & September 2020 to October 2020 have been entered in the passbook on 27.04.2020, 08.05.2020, 08.06.2020, 09.07.2020, 28.08.2020 & 30.10.2020 respectively with illegible impression of date stamp and initial made against each entry of those transactions by which balance in the passbook appears to come of Rs. 23,000(Twenty Three thousand only) up to October 2020. Another monthly installments at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- for the month of November 20 and December 20 are found entered in the passbook as per said copy of the passbook of the said account on 11.11.2020 and 12.2020 (date no mentioned therein) with initial, made against each entry of transactions and accordingly balance has been drawn up as Rs. 25,000/- in the passbook up to December 20, but no impression of date stamp has been put against the transaction of Nov. 20 and December 20 for authentication. The transaction entered in the Passbook for the month of April 2020 to December 2020 appear not to be reflected in the system generated final ledger of the said account .It is nothing but an evasive denial on the part of the ops.  The ops have totally denied that the seals appearing on the passbook were affixed from their end. The ops did not deny that the said agent never functioned on their behalf. They entered 16 entries receiving recurring installments through  Dipali Samonta .She had access with the office seal of the post office. She might got unusual preference for dealing with the financial transactions with the customer on behalf of the ops as agent ;and this type of transactions can not done without the negligence act on the part of the ops. It is not the case of the ops that any internal investigation  was done after getting complaint from the complainant/ consumer or any FIR was initiated for causing investigation by the police. All the 23 nos seals which are appearing on the passbook are of postal department. Remaining two entries of said account on 11.11.2020 and 12.2020 are made by same person which were made against preceding entries. The ops can not disown the liability of the acts or omission done by the agent who used their seal even for a single day. Therefore,  the complainant has rightfully alleged that ops failed to protect it’s customer’s interest from the fraud practice committed by their agent due to gross negligence or any other reasons best known by them. The complainant is entitled to get back his hard earned money which was deposited by him placing good faith and trust upon the ops being a government organization. She is entitled to the reliefs.

   The complainant, as nominee ,is entitled to get Rs. 25,000/- ,the sum  which was deposited along with simple interest @ 10% per annum over the said amount from the date of filing of this case till full realization in the nature of compensation and Rs.5000/-as towards litigation costs.

 Both the points are disposed of accordingly.

         Thus, the case succeeds.

Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

That CC/80 of 2022 be and the same is allowed on contest.

The OPs, who are jointly and severally liable, are hereby directed to pay Rs. 25,000/- ,the sum  which was deposited , along with simple interest @ 10% per annum over the said amount from the date of filing of this case till full realization in the nature of compensation and Rs.5000/-as towards litigation costs within 45 days from the date of this order ; in default the  complainant would be at liberty to put the order into execution as per law.

Let a copy of the judgment be supplied to each of the parties free of cost.