GAUTAM DHANUKA-/ vs POST MASTER GENERAL, JAIPUR

THESE are two connected appeals arising out of the order dated 30.9.91 passed by the District Forum, Churu in Com- plaint Case No. C/42/91 by which the opposite parties were directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1000/- as compensation to the complainant. The complainant has filed Appeal No. 381/91 praying that Rs. 1214/- may be awarded as compensation in lieu of interest. Thus the complainant''s appeal is for the enhancement of the amount. Appeal No. 32/92 has been filed by the opposite party praying that the order dated 30.9.91 may be set aside and the complaint may be dismissed. The com- plainant Gautam Dhanuka is minor son of late Shayam Lal Dhanuka of Ratangarh. He filed the complaint through Shri Rajendra Kumar Mahrotra, Advocate, Ratangarh. It was alleged that the complainant was to obtain maturity value of the National Saving Certificates mentioned in para (2), 1, 2 and 3 of the complaint. The complainant submitted the application alongwith succession certificate on 31.5.91 in the Office of the Chief Post Master, Ratangarh. The amount was paid on 27.7.91 i.e. one month and 27 days after. The complain- ant has alleged that he has suffered loss of interest @ 13% p.a. and bodily pain and mental agony and so compensation may be awarded.

THE opposite parties filed the version of the case and stated that the complainant did not submit the application in the prescribed form. THE amount was paid after getting the application in prescribed form. It was admitted that National Saving Certificates were purchased on 24.6.83 which matured on 24.6.89. THE application for payment was submitted 10 months after i.e. 23.4.90. Checking was done and defects were found and for removal of the. defects certain information was sought from the Post Master, Ratangarh on 25.4.90 and all the papers were sent to the Post Master, Ratangarh on 26.4.90 asking him to get the succession certificate from the complainant as claim was more than Rs. 20,000/-. After obtaining succession certificate the papers were handed over to the Post Master, Ratangarh which were received by opposite party No. 2 on 17.6.91. After necessary checking on 25.7.91 a direction was given to the Post Master, Ratangarh that on the basis of the succession certificate, for the clearance of the matter a prescribed performa may be got filled and after issuing sanction payment may be made. THE entire amount was paid on 27.7.91. Opposite party No. 2 received the papers on 17.6.91 and after complete checking and necessary formalities payment was made on 27.7.91. Mr. Rajendra Kumar Mahrotra submitted an affidavit in support of the complaint. With the version of the case claim application form for settlement of savings certificates of the Deceased holder where the claim is referred on legal evidence of heirship and Copy of Rule No. 11 of the Govt. Savings Certificates Act, 1959 were submitted. The District Forum by its order dated 30.9.91 awarded Rs. 1000/- as compensation for loss of interest for 1-1/2 months and also for expenses and inconvenience for going to the office of the opposite parties. One month''s time was given for making payment of compensation. The complainant was not satisfied with the award of Rs. 1000/-. He has, therefore, filed Appeal No. 381/91 for the reliefs stated above. The opposite parties have also filed Appeal No. 32/92 for setting aside the order regarding payment of Rs. 1000/- as compensation.

Both the appeals were heard together and as common questions are involved, they are disposed of by this order. The complainant has calculated interest for one month and 27 days @ 13% on Rs. 56,400/- and, therefore, a prayer has been made for the award of the calculated amount. According to the opposite parties the District Forum was not right in a warding compensation to the tune of Rs. 1000/-as it failed to appreciate the stand taken by the opposite parties that as the claim was preferred on the basis of the succession certificate and the same required proper examination as well as sanction from the Competent authority, Chum and that as the claim was not filed in the prescribed proforma, a direction was given to the Post Master, Ratangarh that on the basis of the succession certificate for the clearance of the matter a prescribed proforma may be got filled and after issuing sanction payment be made. The entire amount was paid on 27.7.91 to the complainant and, therefore, no amount should have been awarded.

LEARNED Counsel for the complainant in sup- port of his appeal contended that the complainant was deprived of the amount of Rs. 56,400/-on account of late payment by one month and 27 days and, therefore, he was entitled to interest at the rate of 13% p.a. on the aforesaid sum which comes to Rs. 1214/- and, therefore, the amount that was awarded should be enhanced. It is not in dispute that the National Savings Certificates matured on 24.6.89. The application for the payment of the amount was made 10 months after the date of maturity of the certificates. A direction to obtain the succession certificate was given on 26.4.90. The succession certificate was obtained on 30.5.91. The payment was made on 27.7.91. The question is whether the delay of one month and 27 days was justified in making the payment. According to the reply of opposite party No. 2 the complainant delivered the concerned papers after obtaining the succession certificate in the office of opposite party No. 2 on 31.5.91 and an order was issued by opposite party No. 2 to opposite party No. 3 on 25.7.91 and payment was made on completing the formalities viz., sanction etc. on 27.7.91. Even after submitting all the papers in the office of the Supdt. of Post Offices, Churu on 17.6.91 the payment was made on 27.7.91. The District Forum was of the opinion that the time of one month and 27 days taken by opposite parties No. 2 & 3 for making the payment was not reasonable and the complainant suffered loss of interest forone month and 27 days. Not only that for getting the amount on behalf of the complainant, he had to go several times to the office of the opposite parties. According to the complainant the interest on Rs. 56,400/- for one month and 27 days comes to Rs. 1214/- leaving 27 days reasonable time for making the payment the interest for one month comes to Rs. 607/-. The District Forum has taken into consideration the fact that for going to the office of opposite parties No. 2 & 3 several times, expenditure was also incurred and the person was put to inconvenience. So in all a sum of Rs. 1000/- was awarded inclusive of the interest. The District Forum was right in awarding this amount as compensation in lieu of interest as compensation for the expenses incurred and inconvenience caused to the complainant. We repel the argument of the learned Counsel appearing for the opposite parties that no sum should be awarded. So far as enhancement of the amount is concerned the amount cannot be increased for the reason that no interest can be allowed for 27 days as this is reasonable time for making payment after the submission of succession certificate on 31.5.91 and one month''s interest as stated above comes to Rs. 607/- one month''s interest + compensation for expenses and inconvenience, Rs. 1000/- have been awarded and this is fair and reasonable. The amount cannot be enhanced. No of her point survives for our consideration in these appeals.

APPEAL No. 381/91 filed by the complainant and APPEAL No. 32/92 filed by the opposite parties have no force and they are dismissed. In the circumstances of the case the parties are left to bear their own costs. APPEALs dismissed.