SENIOR POSTMASTER, FARIDABAD NIT vs MADAN LAL DHINGRA

THIS order shall dispose of First Appeals Nos. 146 &147 of 1995 filed by Senior Postmaster against Madan Lal Dhingra and Vasu Ram respectively, as the following question of law is involved in both the appeals: - "Whether erroneous indication of a higher rate of interest and higher maturity value can be deemed to be a deficiency in service with reference to the law governing the sale of National Saving Certificates."

In both these case, the facts are almost common. The complainants purchased National Saving Certificates of different denominations during the months of December 1987 to March 1988. On the certificates, it was indicated that maturity value of the certificates of Rs. 10,000/- shall be Rs. 20,150/-. Howeveron maturity, when the complainants presented the National Saving Certificates for encashment, the Postal Department declined tomake payment as per indication on the National Saving Certificates on the ground, that ithad erroneously been so recorded. THIS, according to the complainants, amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and prompted them to approach the District Forum, for the redressal of their grievance as they had suffered a considerable financial-loss.

IN the written statement filed by the Postal Department, it was pleaded that the rate of interest having been reduced by the Government of INdia w.e.f. 1.4.1987, by issuing policy instructions in their circular letter dated 6th of April, 1987, the total amount inclusive of interest payable on encashment of the certificates at any time after the expiry of its maturity period was to be Rs. 190.10 paise for denomination of Rs. 100/- and at similar proportionate rate for any other denomination. It was further pleaded, that these certificates in question had been purchased by the complainants from some Agent of the Postal Department, who had inadvertently omitted to impress the rubber stamps on the certificates, indicating the reduced rate of interest w.e.f. 1.4.1987. Learned District Forum after going through the matter accepted the complaints and directed the opposite party-Postal Department, to compensate the complainants i.e. purchaser of National Saving Certificates by making payment of full maturity value as per representation made by the Postal Department by making indication on the certificates. The Postal Department has further been directed to pay interest at the rate of saving bank deposits for the delayed period i.e. from the date of maturity till encashment of the certificates.

In these appeals before us, learned Counsel for the appellant had vehemently contended that the complainants could not invoke jurisdiction of the Consumer Protection Act in the present cases as there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Postal Department. In support of his contention, he has placed firm reliance on a recent judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India, in SLP (C) No. 38 of 1995 in the case of Postmaster Dargamitta H.P.O. Nellore v. Ms. Raja Prameelamma, decided on 1st of May, 1995. In this case the Hon''ble Supreme Court while reversing the decision of the National Commission, disagreed with the majority view of the National Commission and upheld the view of Mr. Y. Krishnan, Hon''ble Member, who had dissented with the majority view. The operative portion of the judgment is reproduced as under:- "It is evident from the definition of the term "Deficiency" that it must be a fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained under a law or has been undertaken to be performed in pursuance of a contract. In fact of the notification issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, on 1.4.1987 i.e. prior to the date of issue of the certificates, the erroneous indication of a higher rate of interest and a higher maturity value cannot be deemed to be a deficiency in service with reference to the law governing the sale of National Savings Certificates. As regards the contract, no doubt the sale of National Savings Certificates with the terms and conditions embodied thereon constitutes a contract between the Government of India as seller and the holders of the National Saving Certificates. But as this contract was contrary to the terms notified by the Government of India and this was due to inadvertence of the staff. In my opinion, it does not become a contract binding the Government of India being unlawful and void. As such this is not a case of deficiency in service either in terms of the law or in terms of the contract as defined in Section 2(1)(g) of the Consumer Protection Act." "We agree with the reasoning and the conclusion recorded by Mr. Y. Krishnan, learned Member who gave dissenting opinion."

We, therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the orders of the District Forum, State Commission and of the National Commission. As a consequence, the application filed by the respondent stands dismissed. No costs. New Delhi May 1, 1995

IN view of the aforesaid binding precedent, we allow both the appeals and set aside the orders of the learned District Forum and dismiss the complaints with no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.