The postal department is liable to compensate depositors for fraudulent acts of its employees under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

1. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order rendered by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchmahal on 24.12.2020 in Complaint No. 155 of 2014 the original opponents have filed the present appeal under S.15 of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986 before this Commission. For the sake of the convenience, parties are hereinafter referred to by their original nomenclature.

2. The facts given rise to the present Appeal in a nutshell are as under: It is the case of the complainants that complainants have approached opponent No. 2 and 3 with one Mr. Rajesh Trivedi - an agent of the opponents on 5.6.2005 and shown interest to invest money in a MIS Scheme running as a fixed term deposit for 5 years in postal department. It is further the case of the complainant that as per instruction of the opponent No. 2 & 3 complainants have signed necessary forms and after putting signature as a specimen signature, opponents No. 2 and 3 taken all the relevant documents in their possession and informed the complainants that their money has been credited in their MIS Scheme Account and also assured them that the necessary interest accrued thereon will be deposited in their account every month as per rules and regulations and thus complainants have invested total amount of Rs. 9,00,000 through 22 various joint MIS Accounts in the said scheme of the opponent No. 2 and 3 and complainant was also receiving accrued interest thereon in his SBI account No. 34615. However as per say of complainant consequently on maturity date an amount of Rs. 10,32,347 with all the interest accrued on the invested amounts in all 22 accounts has not been paid by opponents. It is further the case of the complainant that on inquiring the office of the opponents, complainant came to know that the agent and officers / staff of the opponents by making forged signatures of the complainants in account closure forms and through false vouchers withdrawn the entire amount of Rs. 10,27,000 from their all joint MIS Accounts illegally on various dates i.e. Rs. 3,60,000 and Rs. 3,00,000 on 7.6.2011, Rs. 3,30,000 on 8.6.2011 and Rs. 37,000 on 16.7.2011. These amount has been withdrawn by putting forged signatures of complainants and witnesses and this embezzlement was made in the collusion of post office employees / Officers and Agent without the consent of the complainant and therefore due to such deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of opponents, complainant has filed Consumer Compliant before learned District Commission Panchmahal.

3. Being dissatisfied with the deficiency in service by the opponents, complainant has filed Consumer Complaint before the ld. District Commission Panchmahal and prayed for to get the total amount of Rs. 10,27,000 with stipulated interest as per MIS scheme and 18% interest from the date of maturity of the said amount. Furthermore Rs. 1,00,000 towards mental agony, financial loss and cost of the Complaint.

4. After hearing learned Advocates for both the parties and after considering the documents and evidences, the learned District Commission allowed the Complaint of the complainant.

5. Being aggrieved by the impugned order of the learned District Commission, Panchmahal the original opponents have filed the present Appeal against the original complainant before this Commission on the ground stated in the appeal memo.

6. Heard learned Advocate Mr. H.D. Shukla for the appellants and learned Advocate Mr. Jaitun Patel for the respondent at length. Perused the record of the case and order of the learned District Commission.

7. First of all learned Advocate Mr. H.D. Shu