SMT. RAVI SUSHA: PRESIDENT
Complainant filed this complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking for a direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs 3% interest to the deposited amount for the extended period from 27/06/2017 and to pay the balance amount of Rs. 13168/- besides to pay compensation of Rs. 20000/- for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and to pay cost of this proceedings.
The gist of the complainant’s case is that the complainant is an ex-service man retired from the Army. An amount of Rs. 1000000 received by the complainant as retirement benefit was deposited on 26/06/2012 in the Senior Citizens, Savings Scheme A/c No. 9040338162 in the Mattannur Post Office. The period of said deposit ended on 26/06/2017. To extend the same to another period of 3 years, the complainant had submitted application to the Mattannur Post Office on 30/06/2017. But till 26/09/2017 the Post Office Authorities did not extend the period of above account of the complainant. Thereafter on several occasions the complainant personally and through telephone requested the Post Master of Mattannur Post Office to extend the period of deposit of amount of the above
-1-
account of the complainant but the post master informed the complainant orally that due to technical error in the computer, the period could not be extend. As informed by the post master he has sent letter to Thalassery Divisional Office, Trivandrum Head Office and Chennai but no reply received from the said offices. When the said complainant started the Account he got 9.3% interest for the deposit. If the account was extended the complainant would have got the same interest rate. Since it was not extended the complainant lost the said interest rate. The complainant used to get Rs. 23250/- as interest in every 3 months. Since the post master, Mattannur was not in a position to give assurance of extension of the account from 26/06/2017 the complainant was compelled to withdraw the deposited amount in order not to loose further interest. So the complainant withdrew the amount on 26/09/2017. At the time of withdrawing the amount the complainant got only 4% interest ie an amount of Rs. 10082/-. Because of the deficiency in service in extending the period of deposit on the part of the Postal authorities the complainant lost Rs. 13168/- as interest. In the month of September 2017 the complainant wrote to the Superintendent of Post Offices, Thalassery Division to pay the amount of Rs. 13168/- but there is no reply. Hence filed this complaint for getting the relief as prayed for.
For proving the case complainant filed his chief affidavit and 4 documents, which were marked as Ext. A1 to A4. A1 is savings bank pass book, A2 copy of complaint dated 29/09/2017, A3 letter sent to superintendent of Post Master dated 02/10/2017. A4 acknowledgement card.
After receiving notice opposite parties jointly filed version admitted that the complainant opened a Senior Citizen Savings Scheme (SCSS) account under number 9040338162 at Mattannur Post Office on 25/06/2012 for Rs. 1000000/- and the account got matured on 25/06/2017. It is also admitted that Sri. Ramachandran.K.K submitted an application for extension of his SCSS account at Mattannur Post Office on 30/06/2017 after the maturity of the account. It is admitted that the request obtained from the depositor was processed from Mattannur MDG. But due to some technical errors the same was not effected in Finacle. Therefore the matter was taken up with higher authorities and for technical solution to Centre for Excellence in Postal Technology, Mysore. These authorities
-2-
also could not resolve the issue immediately and hence necessary approval for continuance of the account could not be issued. While the authorities concerned were continuing their efforts, the complainant closed the SCSS account on 26-09-2017 for his own reasons. As the account is not extended in records, ie in Finacle as per rule 8 (2) of referring Senior Citizens Savings Schemes Rules 2004, if the depositor doesn’t close the account on maturity and also does not extend the account, the account will be considered as matured and the depositor will be close the account at anytime subject to the condition that post maturity interest at the rate as applicable to the deposits under the Post Office savings account from time to time shall be payable up to the end of the month preceding the month of closure of the account. Therefore an amount of Rs. 10082/- was paid to the depositor at the time of closure as interest at SB rate @ 4% on the balance amount for the respective period. Moreover even though as per applicants letter dated 30/06/2017 he has applied for extension, the account is not extended technically, as per Postal Manual volume I rule 180 (ii) if the depositor availing the facility of extension of account, then may be permitted to withdraw the deposit and close the account at any time after the expiry of one year from the date of extension of the account without any deduction. Since the account has been closed, he is not eligible for the interest rate of 9.3%. Interest eligible for Post Office Savings Accounts, 4% only can be paid to him. A compliant was received from the depositor in this regard on04/10/2017. Reply was given to him vide letter No. SB/8/Dlg/2012 dated 16-10-2017 of the 1st opposite party even though his claim could not be complied. It is further submitted that there was no willful act or default or negligence on the part of opposite parties. Hence prays for the dismissal of the complaint.
From the side of opposite parties for providing their contentions superintendent of Post Office Thalassery Division has filed his chief affidavit and 6 documents. The documents were marked as Ext. B1 to B6. Ext. B1 is rule 8 (2) of Senior Citizens Saving Schemes Rules 2004. Ext. B2 is Rule Volume 180 (i) (ii) of Post Office Savings Bank Manual. Ext. B3 copy of Reply given to the complaint dated 16/10/2017. B4 is copy of ticket raised by appropriate authorities of opposite party for rectifying the issue of the complaint. Ext. B5 is copy of Saving Bank order mentioning the rate of interest, and Ext. B6 is copy of the application for opening of
SCSS account submitted by the complainant.
-3-
After taking evidence from both parties, the Learned Counsel of complainant and opposite parties directly filed written argument notes. We have considered the submissions from both sides and carefully perused the records brought before us.
The questions to be decided in this case are (1) Whether there is any deficiency in service or negligence on the part of opposite parties? (2) It so what is the relief entitled to the complainant?
Point No 1 and 2
Here the undisputed facts are an amount of Rs. 1000000/- has been deposited by the complainant on 26/06/2012 in the senior citizens, Savings Scheme Account No: 9040338162 in 2nd opposite party and the said account got matured on 25/06/2017. Further admitted facts are complainant submitted an application for extension of the account at opposite party - 2 on 30/06/2017. It is also an undisputed fact the complainant closed the account on 26/09/2017. The complainant alleged that though he had filed application for extension of the account for another three years on 30/06/2017, till 26/09/2017 opposite parties did not extent the period. For extending the account he had approached opposite party – 2 on several times and even sent letters to opposite parties. Since opposite parties did not taken any steps for extending the disputed account till 26/09/2017 the complainant had compelled to withdraw the account on 26/09/2017. The complainant’s main dispute against opposite parties is that the opposite parties have neither extended the account not given the actual interest rate ie 9.3% from the matured date to withdrawn date. Instead of that opposite parties deducted the rate of interest from 9.3% to 4%. The complainant alleged that due to that deduction of rate of interest the complainant had lost Rs. 13168/-.
In the other-hand opposite parties contended that as per Rule 8 (2) of Senior Citizens Saving Schemes Rule 2004, since the complainant did not close the account on maturity and also did not extend the account he had entitled only 4% interest which was the interest of rate applicable to the post office savings account at that period. Further opposite parties admitted that on 04/10/2017, they received a complaint from the complainant about the deduction of the rate of interest and claiming the balance amount Rs. 13168/- entitled him. Opposite parties claimed that on 16/10/2017 they sent reply to Ext. A3 letter stated that as per rule, Senior Citizen Savings Account cannot be closed before the expiry of one year from the date
-4-
of extension of the account. Opposite parties replied that as per Rule, the complainant is not eligible for the interest @ 9.3%.
It is an admitted fact on 30/06/2017 just after maturity of the savings account, complainant submitted application for extention of the account for a further period of three years. We can see that the opposite party did not give any reply to the complainant for the above said application. Opposite parties explanation is that due to some technical errors in the new web based software, they could not effected as per the application. Opposite parties should have informed the said fact to the complainant. Normally a depositer could be very anxious about the result of his extention application. So there is willfull laches on the part of opposite parties to sent any reply. More over there is no evidence before us to clarify that due to some technical errors it was not effected in time. It is a fact that the complainant withdrawn his account only after three months. So it is not a fault on the part of complainant and we cannot put any blame on him.
With regard to the next contention of opposite parties about Rule 8(2) of SCSS Rules 2004 and Rule 180 (ii) of postal manual volume, the complainant vehimentally deposed that at the time of opening of the account, he has received only the pass book. The annexure I, II, III and IV (Ext. B1 and B2) were not given to him. So he could not understand about the terms and conditions of the savings deposits. Here opposite parties are failed to prove that they had given the relevant rules to the complainant at the joining time of the deposit. Otherwise opposite parties should have given the terms and condition annexure 1 and 2 at the time of giving application for the extention of the account. Without doing so, the opposite parties could not impose those Rules 8(2) and Rule 180 (ii) of Senior Citizens Savings Schemes Rules and Postal Volume 1 upon the depositer. So the complainant is eligible to get the interest amount, which he has received before the maturity period. More over there is no evidence to show that Ext. B3 has been sent to the complainant. The above said actions of the opposite party altogether amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the post authorities. So the complainant is entitled to get relief.
In the result complaint is allowed in part. Opposite parties are directed to pay the balance interest amount of Rs. 13168/- to the complainant. Opposite
-5-
parties are further directed to pay Rs. 10000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs. 5000/- as cost to the proceedings of this complaint. The order is to be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Failing which amount Rs. 13168/- carries interest 12% per annum till realization. Complaint I at liberty to realize the award amount as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.
Exhibits
A1 – Savings Bank Pass Book
A2 – Copy of Complaint dated 29/09/2017
A3 – Letter send to Superintendent of Post Master dated 02/10/2017
A4 – Acknowledgement card
B1 – Copy of Rules (Certified Copy)
B2 – Copy of Relevant Rules (Certified Copy)
B3 – Copy of Reply given to complainant
B4 – Copy of ticket
B5 – SB Order
B6 – Copy of application
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew Sajeesh K.P
/Forwarded by Order/
Senior Superintendent
-6-
