
View 3344 Cases Against Post Office
Pooja Devi filed a consumer case on 28 Jul 2022 against Head Post Office in the Karnal Consumer Court. The case no is CC/430/2022 and the judgment uploaded on 12 Aug 2022.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.
Complaint No. 430 of 2022
Date of instt.27.07.2022
Date of Decision 28.07.2022
Pooja Devi, age about 28 years daughter of Shri Mool Chand Sharma, resident of village Manjura, Tehsil and District Karnal.
…….Complainant.
Versus
1. Head Post Office through its Head Post Mater/Senior Superintendent of General Post Office, Kunjpura Road, Karnal.
2. Post Master, Post Office, Manjura, Tehsil and District Karnal.
…..Opposite Parties.
Complaint U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Before Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.
Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member
Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…..Member
Present: Shri Sanjeev Kumar Manglora counsel for complainant
(Jaswant Singh President)
ORDER:
Complaint presented today. It be checked and registered.
The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant is having saving account bearing its no.203123 with the OP no.2 in village Manjura and has deposited Rs.60,000/-, vide receipt no.03 and Book No.CA-81. It is averred that the original passbook of the said saving account is already in the custody of OP no.2. The abovesaid amount of Rs.60,000/- was deposited by the complainant with the official Incharge namely Pala Ram being the Branch Post Master, posted at Branch Post Office, Manjura and who received the abovesaid amount on behalf of the OPs being an employee/agent of the OPs with the assurance that the amount deposited will be paid with interest on maturity as applicable to such account from time to time. It is further averred that being the Incharge of the Branch Post Office, Manjura used to deposit the amount of maturity to the account holders and believe him as well as the Post Office being Government Department, the complainant relied upon the Incharge of the OP no.2 and deposited the abovesaid amount in her account. The complainant was in need of the deposited amount then it transpires that the said Incharge namely Pala Ram has committed suicide and in his place, a new Incharge joined in the Branch as Branch Post Master. On inquiry, it was found that no such amount has been deposited in the aforesaid account of the complainant and OPs refused to make the payment to the complainant. The aforesaid receipts bear authenticated stamp as well as the signature of the then Branch Post Master. It is further averred that when complainant did not receive the amount, she visited the higher authorities as well as OPs but till date no such payment has been made to the complainant despite receiving of the original passbook against a valid receipt as well as official inquiry conducted by the OPs. The complainant has visited the office of the OPs at Manjura so many times and requested to disburse the amount but OPs did not pay any heed to the request of complainant and lingered the matter on one pretext or the other and lastly refused to pay the same. In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence complainants filed the present complaint.
2. Arguments on the point of admissibility heard. Record perused.
3. The complainant has placed on file receipt no.3 dated 08.01.2018 of the amount of Rs.60,000/- allegedly deposited with OPs branch at post office Manjura through Incharge of that branch at that time. In this document, it is nowhere mentioned that said amount of Rs.60,000/- was deposited with post office as fixed deposit and rate of interest payable on this amount is also not mentioned in the said document. Except this document, complainant has not placed on file any other document to prove that amount was deposited with said branch in fixed deposit. The complainant has not explained the maturity date of the said amount. From the contents of complaint, it emerges out that complainant has alleged regarding receiving of amount of Rs.60,000/- by way of cheating and by putting stamps of post office and has also alleged that Pala Ram Incharge of the branch who got deposited the amount has committed suicide. The complainant has also averred that new Incharge who joined the said post office informed the complainant that no such amount for which FDR pass book duly stamped of post office has been issued by the alleged Incharge has not been accounted for in the relevant books of Post Office and denied to make refund of the amount deposited by complainant. So, from the contents of complaint itself, it appears that there are allegations of cheating and fraud committed by alleged Incharge who has committed suicide. The allegations levelled by complainant are of criminal nature. The complainant has not placed on file any other document i.e. pass book or original FDR. The document attached with the file is not sufficient to issue the notice to the OPs.
4. Furthermore, as per allegations of the complainant she deposited the amount of Rs.60,000/- on 08.01.2018 with the OPs and complainant has filed the present complaint on 27.07.2022 after the gap of more than four years.
5. Limitation for filing a complaint has been described under Section 69 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which is reproduced as under:-
Provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the District Commission or the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, records its reasons for condoning such delay.
6. As per aforesaid Section of Consumer Protection Act, the limitation for filing a complaint is two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. In the present complaint, complainant had alleged that she had deposited an amount of Rs.60,000/- with the OP, on 08.01.2018. During the period from the year 2018 to 2022 there is no correspondence between the parties. Moreover, there is no separate application, on the file to condone the delay or has not made prayer for condonation in the complaint and no sufficient cause has been shown by the complainant for not filing the complaint within limitation period. The cause of action has arisen in the year 2018 but she has filed the present complaint in the year 2022 i.e. after the gap of more than four years. Hence, as per the provision of Section 69 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 the present complaint is also hopelessly time barred and the same is liable to be dismissed
7. Thus, in view of the above discussion, the present complaint is devoid of any merits and deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission and same is hereby dismissed. The party concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced
Dated:28.07.2021
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Karnal.
(Vineet Kaushik) (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)
Member Member
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.