DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.
Complaint case No. 130/2008 Date of disposal: 31/07/2009
BEFORE : THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT : Mr. P. K. Sarkar.
MEMBER : ***********
MEMBER : Smt. J. Sarkar. For the Complainant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Mrs. K. Chatterjee.
For the Defendant/O.P.S. : Mr. S. P. Dutta and Mr. A. k. Sau,
(1) Renubala Barik, W/o-Late Adhir Barik, Vill-Kadamdiha P.O.-Kiyaboni, P.S.-Garhbeta, Dist Paschim Medinipur………….Complaint.
Vs.
1) The Post master General, South Bengal Region, Kolkata-700071.
2) The Superintendent of Post Offices, Midnapore Division, at old LIC more, P.O. – Midnapore & P.S-Kotwali, Dist-Paschim Medinipur.
3) The Postmaster, at Judge’s Court Post office, P.O.-Midnapore, Dist-Paschim Medinipur.
4) The Branch Manager, HDFC, bank, Durgachak, Haldia, P.O. & P.S.-Durgachak (Haldia), Dist. Purba Mdinipur.
5) The Branch Manager, SBI, at Tamluk, P.O.-Tamluk, Dist. Purba Medinipur.
6) The Chief Manager, SBI, Haldia Port branch, P.O.-Haldia, Dist.Purba Medinipur…………………..Ops.
The complainant’s case, in short is as follows:-
The Complainant deposited a cheque for Rs.1,70,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank, Haldia branch, in her S/B A/c on 18/12/2007, in Judges’ Court Post Office, within the Paschim Medinipur Municipality, but the amount of the cheque was not credited in her account and the concerned staff of the post office failed to give any satisfactory reply to the queries of the complainant regarding the encashment of the cheque deposited by her. As such, the complainant filed this case against the Ops with prayer for issuing direction upon them for encashment of the cheque deposited by her and for payment of compensation, interest and cost of litigation to her.
The Op. no.2, the Sr. Superintendent of Post Office, Medinipur Division, contested the case by filing their W/O contending interalia, that they received the cheque in question from the
Contd………….P/2
- ( 2 ) -
Op. no.3 on 20/12/2007 and sent the same to their District Headquarter at Tamluk, Purba Medinipur, on 17/01/2008 for encashment of the cheque through SBI, Tamluk branch and accordingly the Tamluk Post office sent the cheque to the SBI, Tamluk branch on 24/01/08 for its encashment and but the SBI, Tamluk branch did not give any intimation to them regarding encashment of the cheque, in spite of several reminders sent by them. As such, according to the Op. no. 2, there was no deficiency in service on their part as alleged by the complainant. ,
The Op. no.5 SBI, Tamluk branch filed their w/o denying their liability for the delay for encashment of the cheque in question contending interalia, that they sent the cheque to the SBI, Haldia Port Branch on 31/01/08 and subsequently sent the clearance report to the Tamluk Post Office on 07/04/09.
The Op. no.4, the Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, Haldia branch and the Op. no.6 SBI, Haldia Port branch have not turned up to contest the case in spite of receipt of the notice. As such the case has been heard exparte against them.
The points for decisions are :
1) Whether the complainant is a consumer within the meaning of the section 2 (i) (d) (ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986 ?
2) Whether the Ops. are deficient in service within the meaning of section 2 (1)(g) read with section 2(1)(0) of the C. P. Act, 1986 ?
3) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as sought for ?
Decisions with reasons :
Point Nos. 1,2 &3.
All the points are taken together for discussion for the sake of convenience. It is not disputed that the complainant having saving bank account in Judge’s Court Post Office situated within Paschim Medinipur Municipality was/is a consumer of the Post Office within the meaning of section 2 (i) (d) (ii) read with section 2(1)(g) and 2(1)(o) of the Act. Admittedly, the complainant deposited the cheque no. 001804 dt. 29/10/2007 for Rs.1,70,000/- in her account no.2272400 in Judge’s Court Post Office. on 17/12/2007 and the amount of the cheque was not credited in her account till filing of the complaint on 16/12/2008. The affidavit filed on behalf of the Op. no.2, Sr. Superintendent of P.O. disclosed that on receipt of the clearance report to the effect that the cheque was encashed on 07/04/2009, the amount of the cheque was credited in the SB account of the complainant on 28/05/2009 and the complainant will get interest on the amount from 07/04/2009, the date of encashment of the cheque. It is not understood how the cheque issued on 22/10/2007 was encashed on 07/04/2009 after 1½ years. Since the drawer of the cheque was not required to revalidate the cheque, so it may be safely presumed that the
Contd………….P/3
- ( 3 ) -
cheque was encashed by the banker of the Op. no.2, the SBI, Tamluk branch within few days of receipt of the cheque by the bank i.e. in the month of January, 2008 but the clearance report was not submitted to the Op. no.2 earlier by mistake or for any other reason if the contention of the Op. no. 2 that they received the clearance from the SBI, Tamluk branch on 28/05/09, is believed. However, the contention of the Op. no.2.that the cheque in question was encashed on 07/04/09 appears to be false and there is reason to believe that Op no. 2 suppressed the truth to cover up their deficiency in service in the matter of encashment of the cheque deposited by the complainant. So, it must be held that the Op. no.2 and or their banker, SBI, Tamluk branch was negligent and deficient in service in the matter of encashment of the cheque deposited by the complainant in her account on 20/12/2007.As such the complainant is not only entitled to get interest on the amount of the cheque from 01/01/2008 till date but also entitled to get a reasonable compensation for harassment as well as the litigation cost from the Op. no.2.It may be noted that there was no privity of contract between the complainant and the Op. nos. 4,5&6 and as such they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant for the alleged deficiency in service on their part, if any, in the matter of clearance of the cheque in question.
Accordingly, we propose to direct the Op. no.2 to pay interest on the amount of cheque from 01/01/2008 till date at the rate of.10% p.a. and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards compensation for harassment and litigation cost.
Hence, it is
ordered that the complaint be allowed on contest. The Op. No.2 is directed to pay interest on Rs. 1,70,000/- (credited in the SB A/C of the complainant on 28/05/09 ) @10% per annum from 01/01/08 till 28/05/09 within seven days of communication of this order failing which they are liable to pay interest thereon @12% per annum for the period.
The Op. no. 2 is further directed to pay Rs. 5000/- to the complainant towards compensation for her harassment and litigation cost, within one month of communication of this order failing which they are liable to pay interest thereon @12% per annum till payment.
Let the copies of this order be supplied to the contesting parties free of cost.
Dic. & Corrected by me
I agree
President Member President
District Forum
Paschim Medinipur.
Tags: Post Master Region