WHAT WILL BE THE RATE OF INTEREST PAYABLE IF INVESTMENT FOUND WRONG

(Investment in NSS scheme in Post Office)

This was RP No 1573 of 2013 from the order dt. 16.1.2013 from Rajasthan State Commission which was finally decided by National commission on 7.8.2015.

The issue was –Investment in NSS found wrong because as per Post Office Manual VOL.1, RULE 156 an individual depositor like complainant can open only one NSS account all over in India.

Brief facts of the case are that one Sh .Hanuman Prasad opened an account No.6001771 under NSS Scheme of 1987 on 25.2.1991 with Department of post at Alwar Head Office by   depositing Rs 5000/-. Complainant again deposited Rs 6000/-on 26.2.1991 and Rs 13,100/- on 17.3.1992 At the time of maturity after sixteen years ,instead of paying interest @11% ,post office paid interst @ 3.5% as payable in saving accounts .Department had found that the depositor had opened his first account under NSS Scheme in another post office at Arya Nagar S.P.O.on 23.3.1990 bearing Account no 2200003 and hence opening of another account in different post office is contrary to the rule which cannot carry interest at the rate payable under NSS Scheme . .

Sh Hanman Prasad filed a consumer complaint before the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum,Jiapur which was dismissed after hearing both the parties with following observations-

 “according to the above submissions ,we find that it was the duty of the complainant to disclose the fact with regard to earlier account number opened by the complainant .According to the above said rule and submitting false declaration by the complainant we do not find any deficiency of services on the part of the respondents/opposite party “

Complainant went in Appeal to State Commission .State commission was of the opinion that opposite party has to prove that complainant has made false declaration 16 years back. Complainant states that he is a consumer and at the time of opening the account the rules were to be followed by the respondents and the same have not been disclosed to the complainant .Hence rate of interest on another NSS as saving account is not acceptable to him.Department could have closed the account or give notice to the complainant to this effect .This fact stands not proved that complainant was aware of the rule at the time of opening an account Hence appeal filed by complainant was allowed .

When case comes before the National Commission ,opinion of two Members differs . Hon’ble Member Sh Vinay kumar is of the view-

On the point that one individual can open only one account under rule -4,the same rule cast duty upon the department to take undertaking from the account holder that he is not maintaining any other account under the scheme  There is nothing on record that such undertaking was taken. Complainant’s case is that he was never informed that second account was not permissible .Hence there is no deliberate intention to cause deceit to the respondent .Hence complainant entitled to full rate of interest under NSS Scheme.

Justice K.S Choudhuri found complainant had not come with clean hands, hence set aside the order passed by State Commission Alwar which was passed in favour of complainant.

The matter was now referred to third independent judge Sh. Ajit Bhariok who discussed the law connecting to this case for reaching to some logical conclusion.

After going through the entire set of papers and issue in dispute, it is held by the commission now that-opening of two NSS accounts under the scheme by an individual is not permissible as per rule of NSS Scheme 1987.The complainant has opened second NSS in different post office that does not change the rule or status of deposit. This was also an argument that opening two NSS are not barred but benefit under the scheme shall not be given on second NSS,hence it was not the duty of staff to close it or give notice or to remind every depositor about wrong done by him

Another issue was as to whether awarding compensation for deficiency in service on the part of department was justified .It was made clear that awarding compensation to be paid by the department for no wrong done is also found not justified.

 Hence it is clear now that it is the depositor who has to understand rule, terms and conditions before making investment.

Here it is pertinent to make mention of Rule 10 of Post Office Mannual .By this Rule, Central Govt. Ministry of Finance is empowered to relax the rule by recording reason and justification if any depositor is deprived and undue hardship is caused to him due to wrong investment. This rule was discussed in detail in the case of Department of Post &Telegraph V/S Dr R. C.Saxena,1997(1)CPR 74 and in the above case also as reference. It is felt by the courts that this power should be exerciseswith greate caution and in very rare cases. In cases like this ,it is clear from the facts that depositor is opening another account in different post office and not in the same post office meaning there by he is well aware of the rule that he cannot open two accounts . Taking advantage of one’s own wrong cannot be permitted under the law   

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Previous

Next