IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

Present: Hon’ble THIRU JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH:PRESIDENT F.A. No. 531 of 2022 [Against the order dated 25.01.2022 passed in C.C.No.03 of

2019 by the DCDRC, Tiruppur].

Tuesday the 24^th Day of December, 2024 The Post Master, Tiruppur Head Post Office, Head Post Office, Tiruppur – 641 601. … Appellant/Opposite Party - Vs –

R.S.Ramalakshmi, D/o T.R.Ramanathan, Old No.169, New No.343, B.S.Sundaram Road, Tiruppur - 641 601, Represent through her Power of Attorney holder, T.R.Ramanathan. … Respondent/Complainant Counsel for the Appellant/Opposite Party: M/s.S.Janarthanam Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant : M/s. R.Sivaraman This appeal came before me for final hearing on

09.12.2024, and on hearing the arguments of the counsel for the Appellant and the Respondent and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following:-

O R D E R

R.SUBBIAH J., PRESIDENT This appeal has been filed under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as against the order dated 25.01.2022 passed in C.C.No.03 of 2019, by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tiruppur, allowing the complaint filed by the respondent herein, in part.

2. The Appellant is the opposite party and the Respondent is the complainant before the District Commission. For the sake of convenience, the parties in the course of this order will be referred as per their respective rankings before the District Commission.

3. The case of the complainant before the District Commission is that T.R.Ramanathan, father of the complainant had opened PPF Account No.764 on 23.04.1997, since the complainant was a minor at that time. T.R.Ramanathan subscribed 3 PPF Accounts as detailed below:-

Name of the Account Holder	Account Number	Date of opening.	Date of closure
T.R.Ramanathan (Father)	513-0447937831	28.01.1993	28.12.2017
R.S.Ramalakshmi (Complainant)	764-0447939440	23.04.1997	17.05.2018
T.R.R.Rajyalakshmi (Sister)	1222-035079047	04.02.2000	Not yet closed

Every year, deposits were being made by the complainant’s father into the abovementioned three PPF Accounts over a period of nearly two decades. Every year the PPF Passbook was updated and the Post Master duly credited the interest accrued at the prevailing interest rate for PPF deposits. During 2014, nearly around 14 years after the accounts were opened, a letter dated 20.06.2014 was received from the Post Master, Tiruppur, mentioning that subscriptions made in all the three accounts should not exceed the maximum limit prescribed in the PPF Rules from time to time. The letter further went on to suggest that the excess interest allowed should be repaid by the complainant. In response, the complainant’s father sent his reply vide letters dated 24.06.2014 and 16.07.2014 clearly mentioning his stand on the subject matter explaining his interpretation of the relevant rule eventually asking for withdrawal of the letter dated 20.06.2014 and drop the claim proceedings. Subsequently there was total silence from the Head Post Master as to his conclusion or decision taken on the reply letter and the matter was not escalated to any higher authority the appellate forum for possible decision on the issue. Even after the issue of the letter, the opposite party continued to give credit in the passbooks at the interest rates prescribed under PPF Rules, which gave the impression that the explanation given by the complainant was accepted. Hence no further proceedings were initiated by the Head Post Master. During 2018, at the time of maturity of the account the Head Post Master eventually applied PPF rate of interest only for PPF Number 513 standing in the name of the complainant’s father Mr.T.R.Ramanathan and applied only Savings Bank Account interest for the account of the complainant in account number 764 and deducted a sum of Rs.9,02,689/- from the account as ‘Audit Deduction’ thereby causing grave injury to the complainant. The breakup for the inv

Click Here to Read the rest of this document