SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

S.K.DUBEY, SAROJ RAJWADE
SUPERINTENDENT, POST OFFICE – Appellant
Versus
ANIL KUMAR SHARMA – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Applicant :Mr. K.K. Jain, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

ORDER

Mrs. Saroj Rajwade, Member—This revision has arisen from order dated 17.1.1996 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shivpuri (for short 'District Forum') in Complaint Case No. 36/1995, by which applicants were directed to pay Rs. 500/- as compensation with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of order till date of payment, together with Rs. 200/- as costs of suit.

2.The facts of the case are that a call letter for interview as posted from Gwalior on 2.3.1995 for the respondent at Shivpuri. It was delivered to the respondent on 8.3.1995 after the date of interview was over. Although the letter was sent by ordinary post, the District Forum took the view that there was deficiency in service on the part of applicant in that they delivered the letter late on the presumption that letter must have reached Shivpuri on 5.3.1995, although there is no seal with date the envelope. District Forum passed by order referred in para 1.

3. Non-applicant/complainant in his complaint before District Forum had complained about deficiency in service and had prayed for compensation of 5 lakhs of rupees. Revision petitioner/opposite party in his reply had denied the allegations about late












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top