Date of Filing – 21.09.2015
Date of Hearing – 23.10.2017
The instant appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) is at the behest of the Opposite Parties to impeach the Judgement/Final Order dated 30.01.2014 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dakshin Dinajpur at Balurghat (for short, Ld. District Forum) in CC/55/2013. By the impugned order, the Ld. District Forum allowed the complaint initiated by the Respondent/Complainant under Section 12 of the Act on contest with certain directions upon the OPs/appellants like – (a) to collect the passbook and the receipts showing the payment of premium from each of the complainant on proper acknowledgement after supplying the photocopies thereof at the cost of the complainant within 15 days from the date of order; (b) to arrange for examination of those documents by competent Government Handwriting Expert to ascertain how many of those receipts are in the handwriting of the concerned branch Post Master involved in the matter; (c) to supply the examiner admitted handwriting of the said branch Post Master duly certified by the higher authority of the department in the presence or knowledge of the complainant within 15 days from the date of collection of passbook and receives from the complainant. Such examination must be completed within 4 months from the date of receipt of the documents by the handwriting expert and the cost of such examination shall be borne by the OPs; (d) to pay compensation of Rs.6,000/- out of which Rs.3,000/- will be deposited in the State Consumer Welfare Fund.
The Respondent herein being complainant lodged the complaint stating that being attracted with the terms, conditions and prospectus of Life Insurance Policy under the caption ‘Rural Postal Insurance’ (RPLI) opened a policy with the Postal Department on 14.11.2006 being Policy No.RWB-SG-EA-86524 sum assured Rs.1,00,000/- and the term of the policy is 24 years with a monthly premium of Rs.347/-. The complainant used to deposit the premium in every month in the hand of the them Post Master namely Asit Ghosh attached to Ushaharanhat Branch Post Office on good faith and the Post Master of the said branch post office also used to supply receipts to the complainant and complainant accepted the said receipts on good faith. On 19.05.2011 all on a sudden the said Post Master committed suicide and thereafter so many discrepancies in the matter of accounts including the money receipts of the policy holders see the day of light. Due to tremendous public commotion, the Postal Department shifted the said branch Post Office from Ushaharanhat to Kushmandi wherefrom the function of the said post office has been continuing. Thereafter, the Postal Authority directed the complainant/policy holder to submit passbook and other relevant document and papers to the Kushmandi Sub-Post Office for settlement of the claim with a declaration that OPs will disburse the payable amount to the complainant within a period of 15 days from the date of depositing relevant documents but even after six months despite repeated persuasions OPs failed and neglected to settled the claim and disbursed the payable amount. Hence, the respondent on the allegation of deficiency in services on the part of complainant/appellant lodged the complaint with prayer for several reliefs.
The appellants being opposite parties by filing a written version admitted that complainant is a consumer as he is policy holder under RPLI Scheme of Post Office in respect of policy duly issued by the Postal Authority. It has also been admitted that Asit Ghosh, the then Branch Post Master of Ushaharanhat Branch P.O. committed suicide on 19.05.2011 and after his death so many discrepancies in the matter of accounting of money and mis-appropriation of public money by the said Post Master came to surface. The OPs have stated that in order to ascertain the quantum of defalcation amount, the acting Branch Post Master was entrusted to collect the passbook, RPLI-2 receipts from the policy holder for verification of authenticities of entries made therein as well as corresponding entries in the Government account. The OPs have further stated that they never assured the complainant regarding refund of amount without verification and on the contrary, they requested the complainant to submit their claim supported by RPLI-2 receipts but till date the complainant never submit any supporting paper in respect of claim. The OPs have submitted that they are always ready to pay the admissible actual amount after fulfilling the terms and conditions applicable to Rural Postal Life Insurance Rules.
After assessing the materials on record, the Ld. District Forum by the impugned Judgement/Final Order allowed the Consumer Complaint with certain directions, as indicated above, which prompted the OPs to prefer this appeal.
Mrs. Ratna Bhrhmachari, Ld. Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the Postal Authority is ready and willing to make payment to the customer/policy holder of RPLI Policy holder but without proper verification, it cannot be done. Expanding her argument, she has submitted that one copy of policy lies with the policy holder and unless the policy holder files the same before the Postal Authority, it would be difficult to ascertain the actual state of affairs because another copy lies with the post office for keeping record in Ledger Book and the copy of policy holder must be tallied with the said ledger book and unless the respondent cooperate to hand over the same, it would not be possible for them to disburse the amount. She has also submitted that the appellant requested the complainant to submit his claim supported by RPLI receipts but it was not adhere to. Attacking the impugned order, Ld. Advocate for the appellants submits that it is quite herculean task on the part of the postal authority to appoint Government Handwriting Expert to ascertain the documents to be filed by the policy holders in support of their claim and as such she has made prayer for setting aside the impugned order and to remand back the complaint for adjudication after appointment of expert through the Ld. District Forum.
Despite receipt of notice, respondent has not come to refute the contention of the appellants and as such under compulsion, I proceeded to dispose of the appeal in absence of the respondent.
Undisputedly, the respondent was a policy holder of Rural Postal Insurance (RPLI) and opened a policy with the Postal Department on 14.11.2006 being Policy No.RWB-SG-EA-86524 sum assured Rs.1,00,000/- and the term of the policy is 24 years with a monthly premium of Rs.347/-. The respondent was going on paying the money to the then Post Master namely Asit Ghosh attached to Ushaharanhat Branch Post Office on good faith. The said Asit Ghosh committed suicide on 19.05.2011 and immediately after his death, several discrepancies in respect of account of money including the money receipts of the policy holder came into light. In fact, a tremendous public commotion had taken place in the locality for which the Postal Department compelled to shift the said Branch Post Office from Ushaharanhat to Kushmandi wherefrom the function of the said post office has been continuing.
The materials on record do not indicate that the appellants had any intention not to make payment the amount to the actual policy holder. The Ld. District Forum is absolutely wrong by directing the appellants/Postal Department to collect the passbook showing the payment of premium made by the respondent and examine the said document by competent Government hand writing expert to ascertain the authenticity of the documents. We must not be obsessed with the fact that the Postal Department is a party to the lis and as such the Ld. District Forum had no reason to authorise a party to compare the handwriting or signature of the claimant and ultimately the claimant may be dissatisfied with the arrangement and in such circumstances, the entire exercise would be an idle parade. Moreover, one cannot be a Judge of his own cause. The respondent had opportunity to lodge his claim by placing RPLI receipts in order to enable the Postal Department to compare the same with the ledger book for appreciation of the situation. On account of committing suicide by the then Post Master Sri Asit Ghosh of Usharaharanhat Branch P.O. several discrepancies of accounts and defalcation of public money came to surface. The Postal Department being public money i.e. tax payers money, it cannot be given to a person without ascertaining its authenticity.
Considering all the above and having heard the Ld. Advocate for the appellants, I think the Ld. District Forum proceeded in the wrong way in disposing of the complaint and as such the impugned order being not sustainable in the eye of law is liable to be set aside.
For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is allowed exparte without any order as to costs.
The impugned Judgement/Final Order is hereby set aside.
The case is remitted back on remand with a direction upon the parties to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 30.11.2017 and on that date the appellants/OPs must file an application for appointment of Handwriting Expert through the Director, Question Document Examination Bureau (QDEB), CID, West Bengal Police, Bhabani Bhawan (3rd Floor), Alipore, Kolkata – 700027 for examination of the documents filed by the complainant and to compare the same with the signature appear in the ledger book and if such application is filed, the Ld. District Forum will allow the same subject to payment of cost by the appellants/OPs and after receipt of the said report of expert, the Ld. District Forum will proceed to dispose of the case in accordance with law.
The Registrar of this Commission is directed to send a copy of this order to the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dakshin Dinajpur at Balurghat for information.
