Back
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUCKNOW
Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President;
Mr. D.D. Bahuguna, Sr. Member & Mrs. Rachna, Member
SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES & ANR.—Appellants
versus
HARBUX SINGH & ANR.—Respondents
Appeal No. 942/SC of 1995—Decided on 25.9.2001
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants :Ku. Asha Chaudhary, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Rajesh Chadha, Advocate.
The NSCs could be encashed at any Post Office as per Rule 19 of National Savings Certificates (Vth issue rules), and the District Consumer Forum had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
Headnote:
NSCs - Consumer Complaint - Rule 19 of National Savings Certificates (Vth issue rules) - Section 11(2)(a) of Consumer Protection Act
Fact of the Case:
The complainant purchased National Savings Certificates (NSCs) worth Rs. 53,000, of which Rs. 13,000 remained unpaid due to theft. The District Forum found deficiency on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 and directed payment of Rs. 25,000 with interest and Rs. 1,000 as cost.
Finding of the Court:
The District Consumer Forum had jurisdiction to try the case, and the complaint was not barred by limitation. The evidence on record proved that the NSCs for which the claim was lodged by the complainant were correct and the opposite party No. 2 was bound to pay the amount.
Issues: Jurisdiction of the District Consumer Forum, deficiency on behalf of the opposite party, and limitation of the complaint.
Ratio Decidendi: The NSCs could be encashed at any Post Office as per Rule 19 of National Savings Certificates (Vth issue rules), and the District Consumer Forum had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. The complaint was not barred by limitation as there was no denial on the part of the Post Office, and the correspondence between the parties continued till the last moment.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment and order of the learned District Forum were confirmed. The appellant was ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000 as cost of appeal to the respondent/complainant.
Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 5.5.1995 passed by District Consumer Forum, Dehradun in Complaint Case No. 570 of 1994.
2. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant purchased National Savings Certificates (hereinafter called the NSCs) worth Rs. 53,000/- from General Post Office, Shahjahanpur. The said NSCs were payable on presentation on any of the Post Offices. The opposite party No. 1, Union of India, has branches all over India including Dehradun.
3. On 19.10.1985 there has been a theft in the house of the complainant and the NSCs besides other articles were stolen from the house of the complainant. The matter was immediately reported to the police station and the Postal Authorities. The NSCs worth Rs. 40,000/- were paid by the Post Office, but payment of NSCs worth Rs. 13,000/- remained unpaid. The maturity value of these certificates was Rs. 26,000/-. The complainant wrote several letters to the opposite parties for issuing duplicate NSCs for payment and also visited Shahjahanpur and Lucknow in connection with these NSCs. The payments were not made by the opposite parties. When the complainant visited and enquired from the Post Master, Shahjahanpur on 5.2.1988 he was assured that after departmental formalities are completed, the claim will be settled very soon. Thereafter, the complainant received a letter from Post Master, Shahjahanpur then he visited the office of the Post Master General, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. He also assured that the matter will be settled very shortly. Thereafter a reminder was also issued by the complainant on 29.3.1988 but to no effect. The complainant received a copy of letter dated 8.4.1988 from the Post Master General, Lucknow which was addressed to the Superintendent of Post Office, Shahjahanpur and a copy endorsed to the complainant. The complainant, vide his letter, dated 25.3.1989 issued a legal notice. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Shahjahanpur had written a letter to the Counsel for the complainant calling upon the complainant to submit an application for issuing duplicate NSCs. The complainant was assured that the payment will be made at the earliest. Thereafter complainant wrote letters dated 13.7.1993 and 17.7.1993 but nothing was done. When he again met the Post Master, Shahjahanpur on 13.7.1993, he was assured that the matter will be settled very soon. Thereafter another legal notice was issued to the opposite parties on 26.11.1993 to settle the matter and to pay maturity value of the NSCs. The complainant has claimed a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as damages besides the amount of maturity of NSCs of Rs. 26,000/- as well as interest of Rs. 40,403/- at the rate of 18% per annum from 29.11.1985 till the date of payment. Thus a sum of Rs. 1,16,430/- was claimed by the complainant.
4. The opposite party No. 2 in its written version has denied the allegations of the complainant and alleged that there was no evidence with the complainant or with the department which will go to show that the disputed NSCs were purchased by the complainant. It was also alleged that in the absence of any record, duplicate NSCs cannot be issued to the complainant. No disputed certificate was, therefore, received from the office of the Postal Accounts, Lucknow. It has also been alleged that the Consumer Forum had no territorial jurisdiction to try the complaint case.
5. The learned District Forum, after considering the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that there is deficiency on behalf of the opposite party No. 2. Therefore, it directed the opposite party No. 2 to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 15% per annum compoundable annually from 26.11.1985 till the date of payment. Opposite party No. 2 was also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as cost.
6. Aggrieved against the order of the learned District Forum, the Postal Department has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness
