CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO:03/2009.

A.Shanmugasundaram,

S/o.Arumuga Nainar,

9/169 Pothaisuthi,

Kallikulam, Pathmaneri (via)

Nanguneri Taluk,

Tirunelveli District. …Complainant.

..vs..

The Post Master,

Post Office,

Kalakad,

Tirunelveli District. … Opposite party.

This complaint came before us for final hearing on 23-11-2009 in the presence of Thiru M.Subburathinam, Avocate for the complainant and the opposite party called absent and set exparte and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:



ORDER

This complaint is filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986.

1) The averments of the complainant in the complaint are briefly as follows: The complainant is residing in the address mentioned in the complaint and he is an agriculturist by profession. The opposite party is the Post Master, Post Office, Kalakad, Nanguneri Taluk who is solely responsible for all transactions in his office. The complainant is having cheque account in account no.283233 in the opposite party’s office. The opposite party issued a cheque book to the complainant containing 20 leaves in it. From 18-2-2006 onwards, the complainant was depositing a sum of Rs.1,420/- periodically in his account. Meanwhile the complainant wanted to purchase a Bajaj CT 100 motor cycle from the Bajaj Company and he entered into an agreement with the Bajaj Finance Company. As per the agreement the complainant paid a sum of Rs.7,350/- to the Bajaj Company initially and the rest of the amount was paid to the Bajaj Company by Bajaj Finance with a condition that the complainant should repay the balance amount to the Bajaj Finance in 17 installments, installment amount being Rs.1,417/- per month. The complainant also handed over 17 post dated cheques to the Bajaj Finance for collection periodically towards the installment amount. Two cheques of the complainant posted for collection by Finance Company were returned by the opposite party with endorsement insufficient funds as if there was no money in the account of the complainant respectively on 5-5-2006 and 1-2-2007. The cheque Numbers are 352507 dated 20-4-2006 and 352515 dated 20-12-2006 respectively. The complainant had deposited money periodically to satisfy the amount due on the cheques without fail and the opposite party had made relevant entries in the pass book with the seal of the post office. But the complainant was informed by the Bajaj Finance Company that the two cheques were returned and dishonoured in the month of February 2007. Though there was sufficient funds in the account of the complainant and relevant entries have been made in the pass book the opposite party has dishonoured the cheques and thereby caused the complainant to incur a penalty of Rs.2500/- imposed by the Bajaj Finance Company. When the complainant approached the opposite party and questioned about this, the opposite party was reluctant to answer and negligent in discharging his official duties. This caused deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The complainant sent a complaint in this matter to the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Head Post Office, Tirunelveli Division, but no action was taken on it. The act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service and gross dereliction of duties on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint is filed to direct the opposite party to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation amount for the loss and mental agony caused to the complainant and the costs.

2) In spite of receipt of notice the opposite party had not attended this Forum, hence opposite party was called and set exparte.

3) The points for consideration in this case are;

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and if so;

2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

4) Points: To prove the case of the complainant proof affidavit of the complainant was filed and Ex.A1 to Ex.A7 were marked. The case of the complainant is that he has opened an account with the opposite party and opposite party issued a cheque book to the complainant containing 20 leaves. The complainant entered into an agreement with the Bajaj Finance Company to purchase a motor cycle and as per the agreement the complainant paid Rs.7350/- initially to the Bajaj Company and the rest of the amount was paid the Bajaj Company by Bajaj Finance Company with a condition that the complainant should repay the balance amount in 17 installments, the amount being Rs.1417/- per month. The complainant handed over 17 posted dated cheques to the Bajaj Finance Company for collection of the above installments amount periodically. Even though there was sufficient funds in the account of the complainant to realize the cheque amount, two cheques were returned on 5-5-2006 and 1-2-2007 respectively with an endorsement that the complainant is not having sufficient amount in his account, which caused a penalty of Rs.2500/- to the complainant by the Bajaj Finance Company. Counsel for the complainant would contend that though there was sufficient funds in the account of the complainant to realize the amount for cheque Numbers 352507 dated 20-4-2006 and 352515 dated 20-12-2006 they were returned with endorsement as no sufficient funds on 5-5-2006 and 1-2-2007, which caused deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

5) Ex.A1 is the legal notice issued by the complainant to the opposite party. Ex.A2 is the acknowledgement card. Ex.A3 is the pass book for the account of the complainant and Ex.A4 is the ledger copy for the account of the complainant with the opposite party. Ex.A5 is the reply from the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices Tirunelveli Division to the legal notice Ex.A1. Ex.A6 is the account copy of the Bajaj Finance Company Limited in respect of the complainant and Ex.B7 is the R.C. copy for the complainant’s vehicle. From Ex.A6 it is seen that cheque No.352507 posted for collection on 21-4-2006 was returned with an endorsement as insufficient fund on 5-5-2006 and cheque No.352515 posted for collection on 21-12-2006 was returned with an endorsement as insufficient funds on 1-2-2007. On perusal of Ex.A3 it seems that on 20-4-2006 complainant was having Rs.1923/- in his account and on 21-4-2006 he had deposited Rs.1420/- and the total amount in his account was Rs.3343/-. Hence it is proved that on 2-4-2006 when the cheque was deposited for collection he was having Rs.3343/- in his account, the cheque amount being Rs.1417/- only like this it is seen from Ex.A3 that on 6-12-2006 the complainant was having in his account Rs.3971/- and on 29-12-2006 Rs.1417/- was withdrawn and 20-1-2007 he deposited Rs.1420/- and the total amount in his account on that date was Rs.3974/-. From Ex.A6 it is seen that the cheque No.352515 dated 20-12-2006 was returned on 1-2-2007 with an endorsement as insufficient funds. Even though there are sufficient funds to realize the above two cheques on the date of the presentation for collection these two cheques were returned with an endorsement as insufficient funds in the account of the complainant. As rightly argued by the complainant’s counsel it causes deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Hence we hold that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as asked for. We decide this point accordingly.

6) In the result, the complaint is allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the loss and mental agony caused to the complainant and to pay Rs.2000/- towards costs within two months from the date of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute this order u/s.25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Dictated to the Steno-typist, taken and typed by him and corrected by me and pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 7th day of December 2009.