Haryana

Karnal

CC/300/2017

Smt. Kamlesh Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

Senior Post Master, Head Post Office - Opp.Party(s)

22 May 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

                                                     Complaint No. 300 of 2017

                                                     Date of instt. 11.09.2017

                                                     Date of decision 22.05.2018

 

Smt. Kamlesh Rani wife of Shri Dharam Chand age 67 years resident of House no.1191, Khera Colony, outside Jundla Gate, Karnal.

                                                                                 ……..Complainant.

                                        Versus

Senior Post Master, Head Post Office, Karnal.

 

     ..…Opposite Party.

 Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

 

Before      Sh. Jagmal Singh……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:  Shri Dharam Chand husband of complainant in person.

                 Shri Raj Kumar P.A. for OP.

 

ORDER

 

                (JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT)

 

 

                This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, on the averments that complainant had opened an account no.0992348166 dated 20.07.2011 of Rs.1,50,000/- under Monthly Income Scheme (hereinafter referred as MIS) after its maturity on 20.07.2017 alongwith her daughter Ruhi wife of Shri Satnam Singh. Complainant had fulfilled all the requirements and had submitted her passbook with the OP and the OP on the same day had issued a cheque bearing no.661746 dated 20.07.2017 of Rs.1,57,500/- in favour of the complainant and had closed the above said account. Thereafter, the complainant had presented the above said cheque for payment in her account no.0991494103 with the OP on the same day i.e. 20.07.2017 because she had to open a fresh MIS account of Rs.4,50,0000/- after getting the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,57,500/- in her saving account no.0991494103 which was already with the OP and she had also completed all the requirements needed by the OP on the same day. OP had assured the complainant that the amount of Rs.1,57,500/-  will be deposited on the same day in her account but when she submitted the papers alongwith cheque no.718421 dated 20.07.2017 of Rs.4,50,000/- for opening the same, the concerned official check her account and told the complainant that the amount of Rs.1,57,500/- has not been transferred in the present account and the new MIS account cannot be opened until or unless, the amount of Rs.1,57,500/- is transferred by the OP in her saving fresh account.  Complainant visited the office of OP for the clearance of cheque no.661746 in her saving account and the OP went on putting of the matter on one pretext or the other. The abovesaid amount deposited by the OP on 5.8.2017 in her account after delay of more than 16 days. It is further alleged that OP did not informed the complainant regarding depositing of amount in her account till 9.8.2017.  In this way there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to cause of action and locus standi and the present complaint is liable to be rejected as no notice u/s 80 C.P.C. has been served on Secretary, department of Posts, Government of India. On merits, it is submitted that MIS account no.0992348166 dated 20.07.2011 in the  name of the applicant was got matured on 20.07.2017 and cheque no.661746 for Rs.1,57,500/- was issued in favour of the applicant. It is admitted fact that the applicant deposited the abovesaid cheque for clearance in her SB passbook 0991494103 and also submitted the documents for opening of new MIS account for Rs.4,50,000/- but at that time, the new technique of clearance of cheques through ‘Cheque Truncation System  (Introduced by RBI) has been implemented at Karnal HO. The OP had to face many problems during installation of new system of STS for clearance of cheques which caused delay in clearance of cheques. The cheques could not be cleared as the MICRA code of Karnal HO and Panipat HO were found same. Unfortunately, the CTS process took some time for proper installation. As soon as possible, the problems were resolved, the cheque of the applicant was got cleared and new account of MIS was opened at Karnal HO on 9.8.2017. Hence there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OP as delay in opening of MIS account has occurred due to installation of new system of clearance of cheques.

3.             Complainant tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C12 and closed the evidence on 19.01.2018.

4.             On the other hand, OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Shri Prem Singh Sr. Postmaster Ex.RW1/A and closed the evidence on 7.5.2018.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.             It is admitted case of the parties that MIS account no.0992348166 dated 20.07.2011 in the name of complainant was matured on 20.07.2017 and cheque no.661746 dated 20.07.2017 for Rs.1,57,500/- was issued in favour of complainant. It is also admitted by the OP that the complainant had deposited the said cheque in her saving account no.0991494103 which was already with the OP but the OP deposited the said cheque amount of Rs.1,57,500/- in the account of complainant only on 5.8.2017. It is also admitted that the new MIS account of the complainant was opened at Karnal HO on 9.8.2017.

7.             According to the complainant, she had deposited the abovesaid cheque of Rs.1,57,500/-on the same day i.e. 20.07.2017 in her abovesaid saving account because she had to open fresh MIS account of Rs.4,50,000/- after getting the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,57,500/-in her saving account. As the amount of Rs.1,57,500/- was to be deposited by the OP in her saving account on the same day, so the complainant submitted the papers alongwith cheque no.718421 dated 20.07.2017 of Rs.4,50,000/- for opening her new MIS account. But the concerned official, after checking her saving account, told that the amount of Rs.1,57,500/- has not been transferred in her account and new MIS account cannot be opened until and unless Rs.1,57,500/- is transferred in her account. The complainant went on visiting again and again in the office of OP for clearance of abovesaid cheque but the same was deposited in her account only on 5.8.2017 and the OP told about the same to the complainant only on 9.8.2017 and due to this reason the complainant could opened her new MIS account only on 9.8.2017.

8.             On the other hand, OP contended that at that time (i.e. around 20.07.2017)  the new technique of clearance of cheques through ‘Cheque Truncation System (Introduced by RBI) has been implemented at Karnal HO due to which the delay was caused in clearance of cheques. The cheque could not be cleared as the MICRA code of Karnal HO and Panipat HO were found same. The OP made best efforts to resolve the problem.

9.             From the submissions and pleadings of the parties, it is clear that the cheque no.661746 dated 20.07.2017 of the complainant issued by OP was deposited by the complainant in her above saving account with the OP on the same day i.e. 20.07.2017 but the amount of said cheque i.e. Rs.1,57,500/- were deposited by the OP on 5.8.2017 in the account of the complainant after the delay of 15 days. The cheque in question was deposited by the complainant in the same post office vide which it was issued, so there was no need of any clearance and the installation of CTS system had no hindrance in the clearance of said cheque. The complainant produced a letter dated 13.11.2017 issued by the office of Superintendent Post Office, Ambala Division, Ambala vide which information under RTI Act was furnished and in the said letter it is mentioned that the concerned post office is competent to transfer the maturity amount in the saving account of the depositor in the same post office, if both the accounts are in the same post office then there is no need to get issued the cheque. From the above facts, it is clear that the complainant could not open her MIS account due to non-deposit of the abovesaid amount of Rs.1,57,500/- by the OP in the saving account of the complainant. Even otherwise, the said amount of Rs.1,57,500/- remained with the OP, so the OP was liable to pay interest on the same but the OP has not paid the same. Hence we found that the OP is deficient in providing service to the complainant.

10.            Thus, as a sequel to above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP to pay saving bank interest to the complainant for the delayed period 15 days. We further direct the OP to pay Rs.2200/- to the complainant on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses. This order shall be complied with within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:22.05.2018

                                                                       

                                                                  President,

                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                      (Anil Sharma)

                          Member