The case came to the forum after the post office challenged an order of the district forum.
The state consumer forum has directed the senior superintendent of post office in Fatehgunj, Vadodara to pay a depositor Rs 1.4 lakh with interest after the amount was withdrawn from his account using fake signature.
The case came to the forum after the post office challenged an order of the district forum.
Dilip Shah, a resident of Gandhinagar, following his retirement had taken two Monthly Income Scheme (MIS) of the post office of Rs 70,000 each. It was take in the year 2004 and was to mature in 2010. On maturity, Shah signed a form for reinvestment and gave it to an authorised agent of the post office.
Later Shah found that not only had Rs 1.4 lakh being withdrawn from his account but that a part of the money was invested in the name of one Namrata and Ruchir Bhatt.
Shah alleged that the post office officials had conspired with the agent to fake his signature to withdraw his money.
The counsel for the post office argued that the MIS account of Shah was closed as per his request. It further said that the agent for post offices are appointed by the government and the office itself has no role to play in it. Moreover, in the records of the post office, the reinvestment request for the money in Shah's account was in the name of one Namrata and Ruchir Bhatt and so the post office did as it was directed.
It further said that Shah's account was closed in the year 2009 while the complaint was raised in 2013 and hence the complaint should be dismissed due to time lapse.
The counsel for Shah argued his passbook had the post office's stamp and it showed that he had two MIS schemes of Rs 70,000 each.
It further argued that even if for a moment one were to consider the post office's argument that the withdrawal form was signed by Shah even then as per the rules, no amount above Rs 20,000 can be given in the form of cash.
The post office it argued did not have a record of any cheque being given for the withdrawn amount which meant the amount in excess of Rs 20,000 was given in cash.
The forum while upholding the district forum order observed that since the MIS passbook of Shah clearly showed that only part of the amount was invested in the name of Namrata and Ruchir Bhatt it was clear that the post office had not reinvested the money as he had demanded.
It further added that the post office officials had broken the law by paying an amount in excess of Rs 20,000 in cash and if they had paid the money in cheque they have no record to show whom it was paid to.
This, the forum said pointed out to complicity of post officials and the agent in the whole saga.
It thus ruled that the post office needs to pay Shah Rs 1.4 lakh with interest.
CASE FILE
- The counsel for Shah argued his passbook had the post office’s stamp and it showed that he had two MIS schemes of Rs 70,000 each.
- The post office it argued did not have a record of any cheque being given.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Money Deposit")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}