BHARTIYA DAK VIBHAG Vs. KRISHNA KUMAR AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by Bhartiya Dak Vibhag and Am., against the order dated 22.8.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (in short 'the State Commission') passed in Appeal No. 1195 of 2015.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 15.10.2010 the respondent opened a Recurring Deposit (RD) Account bearing No. 1514715 for Rs. 920 per month at Bandikui Mandi Post Office Dausa through a Mahila Pradhan Kshetriya Bachat Yojna (MPKBY) Agent Smt. Nisha Sharma. According to the passbook of the respondent, last instalment was deposited in his account on 19.1.2013 which showed the total balance of Rs. 25,760 but actual balance in the account in the software of the petitioners as on 19th January, 2013 was Rs. 15,640 only. As per the petitioners, on 22.2.2013, the respondent had managed to withdraw an amount of Rs. 12,500 through his agent Smt. Nisha Sharma even though the account was discontinued and actual balance in the account was only 15,640 which is in contravention of Saving Bank Rules. On 27.2.2014, the respondent applied before the petitioners to withdraw his total alleged balance amount of Rs. 13,260. In the year 2014, after the departmental enquiry, it was established that Smt. Nisha Sharma-the agent appointed by the District Collector, Dausa had misappropriated the monthly instalments from June 2011 to November 2011 (6 months) and August 2012 to January 2013 (6 months) by not depositing the respondent's instalment amount in his account maintained with the petitioner post office and used the same for her personal use by printing the passbook with duplicate stamps of the petitioners. On 15.12.2014, the respondent filed the consumer complaint bearing No. 388/2014 before the District Consumer Forum, Dausa (in short "the District Forum") praying for inter alia an amount of Rs. 13,260 with interest from the petitioners.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the petitioners. The District Forum after considering submissions of both the parties allowed the complaint as under on 23.12.2014: