Delhi

StateCommission

A/715/2014

VIMAL KUMAR MALHOTRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

KRISHNA NAGAR HEAD POST OFFICE - Opp.Party(s)

19 Oct 2015

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

Date of Decision:29.10.2015

Date of Arguments :19.10.2015

Appeal No.715/14

 

(Arising out of the order dated 09.06.2014 passed in Complaint Case No.618/12 by the

District Consumer Redressal Forum- East Distt, Delhi.)

 

 

Sh. Vimal Kumar Malhotra,

78A, East Azad Nagar,

Delhi-110051.                                                                     …..........Appellant

 

Versus

Department of Post,

Krishna Nagar Head P.O.

Karkardooma,

Delhi.                                                                                       ….....Respondent

                                                                

CORAM

Justice Veena Birbal, President

OP Gupta Member (Judicial)

 

1.     Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2.      To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

             OP Gupta, Member (Judicial)

 

1. The complainant has come in the present appeal against order dated 09.06.2014 passed by District Forum (East) in complaint case No.618/12 dismissing the complaint.

 

2. The case of the complainant was that he purchased three NSC Certificate No.6NS39EE 16070 to 6NSEE16073, Registration No.85360 dated 07.12.2002 for Rs.10,000/- each.  The OP failed to encash the same.  The complainant sought release of amount alongwith interest and Rs.two lac as compensation.

 

3. OP filed written statement pleading that the NSC certificate referred to by the complainant were issued in the name of one Sh. Gopal Singh, 3104-4B, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad. The same were shown as lost from the custody of Gopal Singh. Duplicate certificates bearing No.43EE050541 to 43EE050544 were issued to Gopal Singh who received the payment against duplicate certificates.  The certificates available in the custody of complainant seems to be suspicious and therefore payment could not be made.  The complainant failed to intimate mode of payment to the post office against certificates possessed by him.

 

4. Ld. District Forum observed that under directions of the Forum, original record in respect of NSC in question was summoned from the post office.  In the register of NSC Sl.No.85345, NSC bearing No.39EE160670273 were issued in the name of Gopal Singh against deposit of Rs.40,000/- through cheque no.468028 of Syndicate Bank, Smt. Prabha wife of Sh. Gopal Singh was shown as nominee.  Thus it dismissed the complaint.

 

5. We have gone through the material on record and heard the arguments. The complainant admitted before us during arguments that he purchased the NSC against cash payment. The same itself is suspicious.

 

6. Moreover, the complainant claimed that his registration number was 85360 whereas registration number of application form of Gopal Singh bears number 85345.

 

7. There is overwriting in digit 7 in date 07.12.08/ date of maturity shown in the NSC produced by complainant. There is overwriting in digit 7 of date 07.12.2002 / date of issue of NSC. Still further if the NSC were purchased on 05.12.2002 and the same matured on 05.12.2008/07.12.2008, there is no reason why the complainant did not lodge claim till 12.11.2011.

 

8. The Inspector of Post Office submitted that when registration no. 85345 was issued in November, 2002 as is depicted in the application form of Gopal Singh, registration no. 85360 which is still subsequent could not be issued in July, 2002 i.e. before November, 2002 as claimed by the complainant.

 

9. The complainant submitted that officials of the respondent joined hands with Gopal Singh and issued duplicate certificates to him. It made the payment of duplicate certificate to said Gopal Singh and thereby denied payment to the complainant.

 

10. We are unable to impress ourselves with the arguments of complainant. Gopal Singh informed the Post Office about loss of NSC on 14.12.2002 itself which is much prior to the date of maturity in December, 2008.  The certificate of Gopal Singh were issued against the payment received through cheque from the account of Gopal Singh.

 

11. From the material on record, we do not find that complainant has been able to prove his case.  The appeal is dismissed.

(Justice Veena Birbal)

President   

 

 

 (O.P. Gupta)

   Member (Judicial)

245.