M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT
1. The Complainant before the lower Forum is the appellant herein.
2. The complainant, who was in service, and retired is receiving a monthly pension of Rs.547/- from 21.06.2002 through Indian Overseas Bank, Valmiki Nagar Branch, Chennai 600 041. The complainant received the pension amount regularly upto January 2005 and for the month of February 2005, pension amount has not been received. Despite the complainant has requested the opposite parties to expedite the pension, and inform the reason for the delay, there is no reply. However, the unpaid of arrear of pension for the month of February 2005, has been received by the complainant on 02.04.2005 along with pension for March 2005. Later, the opposite parties informed that the pension payment was delayed, for want of Life Certificate which must be incorrect, since the Life Certificate of the complainant, has already been sent to Indian Overseas Bank, Valmiki Nagar Branch, Chennai-41. The opposite parties did not perform their part of duties, which amounts to deficiency in service as contemplated under Consumer Protection Act, 1986, for which, the complainant is entitled claim to compensation of Rs.75,000/-, for mental agony, physical hardship and financial strain, in addition to punitive damage of Rs.20,000/- for not replying immediately as well as cost, totaling a sum of Rs.95,000/-.
3. The opposite parties denying the allegations leveled in the complaint, would contend that the delay was due to non submission of Life Certificate, when received, paid forthwith, which was received by the complainant also, through Bank. This being the position, accusing the opposite parties as if they have committed deficiency in service is unwarranted, baseless, devoid of merit and in this view, the petition should be dismissed.
4. The District Forum, Chennai (South) on the basis of the above averments, took the case for hearing, wherein, six documents have been exhibited by the complainant, in addition to, filing affidavit. Perusing the documents as well as analyzing the admitted facts, the District Forum come to the conclusion that there is no deficiency of service and delay if any was due to non-furnishing of Life Certificate and this being the proved position, claiming any amount as compensation is baseless. In this view, the claim came to be dismissed on 28.03.2005, which is under challenge, before this Commission.
5. Heard. The Petitioner/Appellant (in person) as well as the Learned Counsel for the Respondents/Opposite parties.
6. A pensioner, who is the senior citizen also, complained before the District Forum, as if the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service, which they are duty bound, and because of delay caused by them, in non-performing their duties, much loss caused to him, which should be compensated, in terms of money, quantifying the same at Rs.95,000/-, which was opposed successfully, resulting this appeal.
7. The complainant argued before us, the delay caused by the opposite parties is not at all explained and for the non-explanation, despite issue of notice, they should be directed to pay the compensation, since it caused mental agony etc. to him, which is opposed. By going through the averments, documents, the order of the lower Forum, and giving our anxious thought, we are of the opinion, that this senior citizen is attempting to misuse the Forum, thereby to gain something, for which, we cannot be parties. Admittedly, the pension payable to the Pensioner for the month of February 2005, was not credited in his bank account namely Indian Overseas Bank, Valmiki Nagar Branch, Chennai in the next month. It is also an admitted fact, that the unpaid arrear for the month of February 2005, was received on 02.04.2005, along with pension for the month of March 2005. Therefore, if at all, there is a delay of one month or so, which is well explained in the Written Version, which has to be accepted, as did by the lower Forum. It is an admitted position, that every year, a pensioner should submit the Life Certificate, for the payment of the pension. It seems, as submitted by the complainant, he has submitted the Life Certificate to the Bank elsewhere in the month November or December 2004. We have no material that the Bank immediately, transmitted the same or informed the same, to the opposite parties enabling them to pay the pension forthwith. If the Bank had delayed in sending the Life Certificate to the authorities concerned, the deficiency may be with Bank and not that of opposite parties. The Bank has not been impleaded, as a party. The complainant has also failed to produce any documents or certificate from the Bank, as if the Bank without any delay, forwarded the Life Certificate to the authorities concerned. In the absence of such proof, we are unable to conclude, that despite Life Certificate has been received by the opposite parties, they failed to pay the pension amount, which alone can be termed as deficiency in service. As soon as, the Life Certificate was forwarded or transmitted to the authorities concerned, by the Bank, it seems without any further delay, the opposite parties have credited the amount, which also received by the pensioner namely the complainant. Therefore, there is no delay of any kind on the part of the opposite parties and this being the position, the grievance of the complainant, that the respondents have committed delay or failed to reply for his communication, thereby causing mental agony or physical strain etc., are all the fertile imagination of the senior citizen, for which, no remedy is available, under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, which was properly analyzed and correct decision has been rendered, in which, there is no error, warranting our interference.
8. In the result, the appeal fails and same is dismissed, confirming the order of the lower Forum, with the cost of Rs.1,000- payable to the respondents/opposite parties by the appellant/complainant.