C.C. 57 OF 2009
1) Sri Brojo Bandhu Bhar

2) Smt.Mira Bhar

Wife of Sri Brojo Bandhu Bhar

Residing at Lalbagan Bhavan,

Charan Bhar Road, P.O. & P.S.

Chandernagore, Dist.Hooghly …. Petitioners

-vs-
1) Department of Post, India

Sub Post Master (MSG-l)

Chandernagore, Dist.Hooghly.

2) Department of Post, The Senior

Superintendent of Post : South

Hooghly Division, P.O. & P.S.

Srirampur, Hooghly. …. Opp.Parties

Present : D.K.Basu …. President

S.Basu …. Member

R.Roychowdhury Malakar … Member
Date of delivery of Judgement : 1.1.2010

The fact of the complainants’ case in a nutshell is as follows :

The complainants Brojobandhu Bhar and Smt. Mira Bhar have filed this case against the Ops namely Op no.1 Department of Post, India Sub Post Master, Chandernagore, Dist.Hooghly and Op no.2 Department of Post, India , The Senior Superintendent of Post , (South Hooghly Division), Serampur alleging that Prativa Bhar and Prasun Bhar purchased a Kishan Bikash Patra on 25.1.1999 to the tune of Rs.5,000/- vide number 35BB 525379 for six years terms issued from Chandernagore Post office. Prativa Bhar died on 13.5.1999 leaving behind her two brothers namely Dr.Anath Bandhu Bhar and Brojobandhu Bhar, who inherited the same Kishan Bikash Patra. Thereafter, Anath Bandhu Bhar died as a Bachelor leaving behind him his brother the petitioner no.1 Brojobandhu Bhar. Prasun Bhar died leaving behind his mother Smt.Mira Bhar as his heir . Thus, the petitioners inherited all the interest of moveable and immoveable property of Prativa Bhar and Prasun Bhar. The abovecited Kishan Bikash Patra matured on 29.1.2005. The petitioner no.1 met the Op no.1 and requested him to look into the matter for releasing the amount of KVP in their favour. Inspite of oral assurance from the Op no.1 nothing was done in favour of the petitioners. In response of a letter of the petitioners dated 9.10.2007 the Opposite parties on their Memo.no.GENL/claim/KVP/CDG/07-08 dated 6.11.2007 asked the petitioners for filling up the application claim form along with all documents for resubmission after the compliance of certain procedures. The complainants submitted all documents to the Op no.1 on 4.2.2008 and on several requests the complainants did not get the matured amount . On 26.4.2008 the complainants gave a reminder to Op no.1 for taking expeditious action, but in vain. By filing the instant case they have prayed a direction upon the Opposite parties for releasing the matured KVP amount of Rs.10,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of maturity upon Rs.10,000/-, a direction upon the Ops for payment of compensation of Rs.5,000/- , litigation cost of Rs.3,000/- and other reliefs.

The Ops by filing a written version has contested this case denying the material averment as to negligency on their part, contending inter alia that the petitioners are to

prove strictly that Prativa Bhar died intested on 13.5.1999 leaving behind her Anath Bandhu Bhar and Brajabandhu Bhar as legal heirs and also they have to prove that after demise of Prasun Bhar ,Smt.Mira Bhar inherited the interest of Prasun Bhar. The petitioners filed the claim application on 4.2.2008. Yet the concerned necessary papers /requisites have not been filed . The complainants have not filed any succession certificate in their favour as to demise and inheritance of the above persons and there is /was no deficiency in service on their part and the case is liable to be dismissed.

During argument the learned lawyer of the complainants has stated that they have received a cheque of Rs.10,700/- on 7.11.2009 from the Ops. He has further stated that the maturity value of Rs.5,000/- was on Rs.10,000/- as on 25.1.2005. The interest from 26.1.2005 to 7.11.2009 will be higher than Rs.700/- .
In view of the above facts only points is to be considered whether caused any deficiency in service on the part of the Ops for releasing the payment on 7.11.2009 to the complainants.
FINDINGS WITH REASONS

The learned lawyer of the complainants has argued that they have received Rs.10,700/- from the Ops on 7.11.2009. The maturity value of said KVP was Rs.10,000/-. The Ops have given interest only Rs.700/- from 25.11.2005 till 7.11.2009. The interest will be obviously higher than the awarded amount of Rs.700/-. By filing the instant case they have prayed for further interest , litigation cost and compensation due to deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.

The learned lawyer of the OP has argued that admitted fact that the purchaser of the KVP expired on different dates though the same dates have not been stated in the complaint. They have filed the claim form on 4.2.2008 . But they have not filed any Succession certificate for receiving the payment showing the heirs of the deceased. As the valid documents showing the heirs of the deceased have not been filed in time the Ops were unable to making payment to the parties /complainant. Without filing the Succession certificate showing the heirs of the deceased , the Ops are unable to make payment to the complainants. Thus, there is /was no negligence on the part of the OP.

Admitted fact that the purchaser of KVP died on different dates and after their demise the complainants as per the complaint inherited the interest of the deceased . We find much substance in the argument of the learned lawyer of the OP that without filing the succession certificate the settlement of payment cannot be made . It is fact that no succession certificate has been filed by the complainants . Mere filing the affidavit by the complainants does not fulfil the requisites of law . However, the payment has already been made . In making the payment on 7.11.2009 after due process , we find no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops .

In view of the above observation, we are of opinion that, the complainants have failed to establish the deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.
Hence ordered
That the instant case is dismissed on contest without any cost.
Hand over a copy of this order to the parties free of cost.

The case is disposed of beyond the statutory period.