UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAMANBHAI B PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these appeals arise from the claims preferred by respective consumer against the Postal Department before the learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Rural), Ahmedabad District in respective complaints. Particulars of appeal number, relative complaint number, name of the complainant/s and the amount awarded by the learned Forum are set out in the following table: Sr. No. Appeal No. Comp. No. Name/s of Complainant/s Amt. Awarde Rs. 01 98/04 127/03 Rameshbhai Patel and Lalitaben A. Patel 48,000 02 122/04 119/03 Ramanbhai Patel and Lalitaben A. Patel 1,50,000 03 123/04 120/03 Ramanbhai B. Patel 96,000 04 124/04 121/03 Karunaben V. Patel 36,000 05 125/04 122/03 Jayantibhai Ambalal Patel 62,000 Reenaben J. Patel in all 06 126/04 123/03 Jayantibhai Ambalal Patel and 1,34,000 Ushaben J. Patel in all 07 127/04 124/03 Ushaben J. Patel and Hiral J. Patel 66,000 08 128/04 125/03 Piyush Ramanlal Patel 60,000 09 129/04 126/03 Shantilal Patel 96,000 10 130/04 118/03 R.B. Patel and Lalitaben A. Patel 60,000

(2.) OUT of the aforesaid appeals and complaints, Appeal No. 130 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 118 of 2003, Appeal No. 122 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 119 of 2003, Appeal No. 123 of 2004 relating Complaint No. 120 of 2003, Appeal No. 124 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 121 of 2003, Appeal No. 128 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 125 of 2003, Appeal No. 129 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 126 of 2003 and Appeal No. 98 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 127 of 2003 are in respect of claim under the head Monthly Income Scheme of the opponent Postal Department. Appeal No. 125 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 122 of 2003, Appeal No. 127 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 124 of 2003, Appeal No. 126 of 2004 relating to Complaint No. 123 of 2003 are in respect of Time Deposit Account with the opponent Postal Department. The complainants are inhabitants of village Vahelal, Tal. Dascroi, District Ahmedabad. Respective complainants had an occasion to invest their monies with the opponent Postal Department as per the particulars set out in the respective complaints. They received the passbooks with entries showing their investment. It was also their case that the opponent Postal Department went on paying monthly interest right from January 1999 in one case, December ,1999 in another case, May 1998 in third case, February, 2000 in fourth case, May, 2000 in fifth case, August, 96 in sixth case and February, 1998 in seventh case. Out of the said accounts, interest was remitted in the recuirring account of the complainants of Complaint No. 120 of 2003 and Complaint No. 127 of 2003. Relevant particulars of payments of interest made by the opponent Postal Department to the relevant complainants are set out in the impugned order. The complainants made grievance with regard to non -receipt of interest from September, 2000 and also complained about the same before the concerned officer of the opponent Postal Department. In the meantime, they came to know that the Sub -Post Master of Village Vahelal Shri Arvind A. Patel had misappropriated the cash around Rs. 60 lakhs from the accounts of the investors during the period 29.6.1989 and 21.8.2000. The complainants were informed about the fact that the said Sub -Post Master misappropriated their money and their interest amount was not being paid to them. Criminal complaint has also been filed against the said Post Master. As, in spite of their repeated requests, the opponent Post Department did not pay their invested money in the Monthly Income Scheme accounts, they were required to approach the learned Forum by way of respective complaints.

(3.) THE opponent Postal Department contended before the learned Forum that highly disputed and complicated questions of facts and law were involved in the matter and, therefore, elaborate evidence was required to be adduced in each of the complaints. Accordingly, the complainants should be relegated to their remedy before the Civil Court. Besides, the complainants did not produce satisfactory evidence with regard to the respective amounts alleged to have been deposited by them in respective monthly income scheme accounts. According to the opponent Postal Department the complainants have respectively deposited Rs. 600, Rs. 1,500, Rs. 960, Rs. 360, Rs. 600, Rs. 960 and Rs. 480 and not Rs. 60,000, Rs. 1,50,000, Rs. 96,000, Rs. 36,000, Rs. 60,000, Rs. 96,000 and Rs. 48,000 respectively as alleged. Further, the Sub -Post Master of Village Vahelal had no authority to open MIS Accounts and only the Head Post Master was having such authority. According to them collusion between the complainants on one side and aforesaid Post Master on the other side cannot be ruled out and accordingly it is possible that the entries of payment of monthly interest might have accordingly been made. Accordingly, the opponent Postal Department prayed for dismissal of the complaints.