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

PALOK BASU, RAGHUNATH PRASAD
SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES – Appellant
Versus
MOHINUDDIN – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Dr. Udai Veer Singh, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party :Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate.

ORDER

Mr. Raghunath Prasad, Member—This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the judgment and order dated 30.1.1996 passed by District Consumer Forum, Hamirpur in Complaint Case No. 16/1995.

2. We have heard Dr. Udai Veer Singh, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri R.K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant and have perused the entire record carefully.

3. It was argued by Dr. Udai Veer Singh that it was mandatory obligation on the part of the complainant, in case of expressing an intention of withdrawal, to submit the declaration contained in Form 15-1 maintained under Section 197(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Since in the instant case the compliance was made on 3.10.1994 and when the said form was sent to the Hamirpur Post Office it transpired that the complete postal address was not furnished by the complainant and under the circumstances it was further argued that some delay took place which will not amount to a voluntary inaction on the part of the appellant amounting to the deficiency of service and this legal aspect of the matter was totally ignored and thus it was argued that the impugned judgment and order is not sustain






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