Date of filing   : 14.06.2016

Date of Hearing: 12. 12.2017

          The present appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” ) is at the behest of complainant to impeach the judgement/ final order dated 17.05.2016 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Rederessal Forum, Burdwan  (in short, Ld. District Forum ) in consumer complaint no. 83/2015 whereby  the consumer complaint initiated by the Appellant U/s. 12 of the Act was allowed on contest without any  costs with the  direction upon  the Respondents to made payment of Rs.12,45,033/- for the period from April, 2012 to 20.07.2013 @ 6% p.a. to the appellant within  45 days from the date of the judgement, in default the decreetal amount shall carry penal interest @ 8% p.a. for the default period, to   pay a sum of Rs. 500/- as compensation.

       The appellant  herein being complainant lodged the complaint asserting that on 23.03.1993  he opened one PPF Account being no . PPF-520 with OP No.1 Post Office by depositing Rs.6,000/- and a Pass Book was issued and delivered to him. Thereafter, he had started to deposit regularly in this Account for last 20 years and he  last deposited Rs. 70,000/- on 25.03.2013 when the total balance comes to Rs.12,45,033/- including interest upto  31.03.2012 as per Pass Book. On 16.07.2013 the complainant was advised by the Postal Staff to close the PPF Account as the same cannot be continued further for HUF  account. Accordingly, by a letter dated 18.07. 2013, complainant requested the Postmaster to close the PPF account and make payment of the  credited account. The OP had made payment of Rs. 9,86,376/- on 20.07.2013. From the Pass Book it  reveals that inspite of adding the interest of Rs.2,79,654/- for four consecutive years it has been deducted from credit balance amount of Rs. 12,45,033 /- and thereafter only closing interest of Rs.20,997/- was added. The complainant alleged that the OP has calculated the amount whimsically without any basis . Hence,  the appellant approached the Ld . District Forum with prayer for several  reliefs, viz – (a) towards payment of above due amount – Rs. 2,58,657/-  ; (b) towards non-paid interest for the period from April, 2012 to 20.07.2013 – as would be calculated ; (c) towards cost of harassment Rs. 50,000/- and (d) towards  cost of litigation and others Rs. 5,000/- aggregating Rs.3,13,657/- plus interest of the above amount @ 12% p.a. from the date of closing the account till the date of payment.

       The  respondents being OPs by filing written version have stated that  as per Government Rules and Notifications of Finance Department of Government  of India it was directed that no PPF account opened in the name of HUF will be extended after maturity as per GSR 286 (E) dated 13.05.2005 circulated as order No.SB 10/2004 dated  05.09.2005 and as such the complaint should be dismissed.

       After assessing the materials on record, the Ld. District Forum by the impugned judgement/final order allowed the complaint filed by the appellant, with certain directions, as indicated above. Being dissatisfied with the awarded amount, the complainant has come up in this Commission with the present appeal.

       I have scrutinised the materials on record and considered the submission advanced by the Ld. Advocates appearing for the parties.

       Having heard the Ld. Advocates appearing for the parties and on going through the materials on record it would reveal that the appellant opened one PPF account in Raniganj Post Office being PPF Account no.520 by depositing Rs.6,000/- and a Pass Book was issued and delivered to him. Thereafter, he had started to deposit regularly in this Account for last 20 years and he  last deposited Rs. 70,000/- on 25.03.2013 when the total balance comes to Rs.12,45,033/- including interest upto  31.03.2012 as per Pass Book. In fact,  the appellant uninterruptedly deposited money in his PPF account from 29.03.1993 to 25.03.2013 . On 25.03.2013, the total balance in PPF account was Rs. 12,45,033/- including interest.

       Be that as it may,  the Ministry of Communication and I.T., Department of Posts, Government of India circulated an order on 13.12.2010 mentioning as follows : “PPF accounts in the name of HUF prior to  13.05.2005 cannot be further extended after maturity and no further deposit can be accepted in such accounts after maturity. PPF accounts opened in the name of HUF prior to  13.05.2005 will be closed on maturity i.e.  31st March of the 16th Financial Year from the year in which account was opened and no further interest will be admissible. PPF accounts opened in the name of HUF prior to 13.05.2005 but have already been matured but not yet closed shall be closed on 31st March, 2011 after which no further interest shall be admissible”.

       On behalf of appellant, it has been submitted that the appellant was not aware about such circular and  the Postal Authority never informed  the appellant to that effect. It is well settled  that ignorance of law is of no excuse but at the same time it is also interesting to note that the respondent no.1 was going on accepting the amount in PPF account without any interruption.

       The fact  remains  that  the respondent no.1 did not give any interest credited in favour of the appellant from 2008 – 09 to 2011 – 12 although the appellant was going on depositing the amount in PPF account.

       In a decision reported in  I (2011) CPJ 41 ( Senior Superintendent of Post Office & Anr. –vs. – Ashok Kumar HUF ) the National Commission  has  observed  that in maturity the complainant  was not paid the amount with full interest and the Ld. District Forum directed the OP/appellants to pay the balance amount. The State Commission directed that the complainant was entitled to  6% interest. The Hon’ble National Commission upheld the order on the ground that since the deposits continued with the OP, it was, therefore, liable to pay interest. In another case reported in  IV (2010) CPJ  201 ( Senior Post Master, Head Post Office, Thanjavur – vs.- G. Nalini & Anr. ) the Ld. District Forum directed the OP to pay interest at 12% p.a. The Hon’ble State Commission of Tamil Nadu held that since the appellants had enjoyed the benefits of the amounts deposited by the complainant, it was bound to pay interest under equity also. The OP was directed to pay interest  @ 9.55% p.a.

       The principles of law laid down in those cases will squarely apply in the facts and circumstances of the present case. After completion of PPF account on expiring of  16 financial year the liability of the respondent will be limited to make payment of interest  @ Rs. 6% p.a. over the deposited amount @ 6% p.a. till 20.07.2013. The Ld. District Forum has misdirected itself in passing the order to make payment of interest @ 6% p.a. for the period from April 2012 to 20.07.2013 appears to be baseless for which  the complainant had to knock the door of the Commission.

       In view  of  the above, the impugned judgement/final order is modified to the extent that the  respondents  /OPs shall pay interest @6% p.a. over the deposited amount on and from the date after expiry of 16th financial year  from the date of opening of  PPF account on 29.03.1993 till the date of closing of account on 20.07.2013 in favour of the appellant /complainant within  30 days from date otherwise the deposited amount shall carry interest @ 8% p.a. for the default period.

        With the above observations and direction,  the instant appeal stands disposed of.

       The Registrar of the Commission is directed to send a copy of the order to the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Burdwan  for information.