SUB POST MASTER SUB POST OFFICE Vs. JONNALAGADDA VENAKTA GAYATHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the orders in C.D.No.178 of 2006 and C.D.No.179 of 2006, the opposite party no.2 preferred F.A.No.863 of 2007 and F.A.No.865 of 2006. Since both these appeals deal with common facts they are being disposed of by a common order.

(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.1 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 from the accounts of the complainant and her mother and credit the monthly interest to the recurring deposit account of the complainant with the second opposite party.

(3.) The second opposite party discharged her duties as the agent of the opposite party no.2 by utilizing the service of her son K.Laxminarayana as and when required. 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 the MIS scheme on 27.4.2002 by using 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 27.4.2002. The first opposite party has misappropriated the recurring deposit amount on 25.11.2003. The opposite parties no.1 and 2 made entries in the passbook till 30.4.2004 as if the account was alive.