SUB POST MASTER SUB POST OFFICE Vs. JONNALAGADDA BALARAMA SHASTRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.D.No.177 of 2006 directing it to pay an amount of Rs.36,000/- and an amount of Rs.29,640/- with interest and a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, the opposite partyno.2, Sub-Postmaster, Nagarampalem, Guntur has filed the appeal contending that the complainant was negligent and to the effect she has made a statement in the third page of the complaint that she had authorized the opposite partyno.1 to collect recurring deposit amount from her account and that the opposite party no.1 is not the agent appointed by the postal department. It was contended that the complainant had admitted in the statement made during the course of enquiry by the opposite parytno.2 that she used to sign blank withdrawal forms allowing the son of the opposite party no.1 to withdraw amount from her MIS account. There was no collusion between the son of the opposite party no.1 and the opposite party no.2 in allowing the son of the opposite party no.1 for the withdrawal/closure of the account of the complainant. The issues involved complicated questions of fact and law. A criminal case has been registered and in view of the bulk of documents and evidence need to be led, it is not possible to try the matter in a consumer forum.

(2.) The facts of the case as narrated by the complainant are that her father believing the version of the opposite partyno.1 deposited an amount of Rs.36,000/- on 22.10.1998 in the name of the complainant with the opposite party no.2 under monthly income scheme for a period of six years. The second opposite party paid an amount of Rs.390/- towards monthly interest to the complainant. The complainant opened a recurring deposit account with the second opposite party for an amount of Rs.520/- per month. The complainant deposited the monthly recurring deposit amount of Rs.390/- from her MIS account and Rs.130/- from her mothers MIS account, a total amount of Rs.520/- per month. The first opposite party was authorized to collect recurring deposit amount every month from the complainant from the accounts of the complainant and her mother and credit the monthly interest to the recurring deposit account with the second opposite party.

(3.) The second opposite party discharged her duties as agent of the opposite party no.2 and as and when required she used to take the service of her son K.Laxminarayana. The first opposite party obtained withdrawal forms signed by the complainant for the purpose of withdrawing the interest of Rs.390/- under the MIS scheme and also obtained withdrawal form signed by the complainants mother to withdraw the interest of Rs.130/- under the MIS scheme and deposited the amounts in the recurring deposit account of the complainant from time to time. The second opposite party made relevant entries for withdrawal and payment of the amounts in both the passbooks regularly. The first opposite party with malafide intention and with the help of the second opposite party misappropriated the amounts of Rs.36,000/- under MIS scheme on 24.12.2001 by submitting the withdrawal form. The opposite parties no.1 and 2 used the withdrawal form for closure of the account without receiving any written consent from the complainant. The first opposite party with the help of the second opposite party made entries in the passbook even after closure of the account. The passbook entries show the account continued till 30.4.2004 as against the misappropriation committed on 24.12.2001. The first opposite party has misappropriated the recurring deposit amount on 19.11.2003. The opposite parties no.1 and 2 made entries on the passbook till 30.4.2004 as if the account is alive.