Oral

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P. Lucknow.

Appeal  No. 1022  of  1997

1- Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle,

    Lucknow.

2- Director, Postal Life Insurance, Lucknow.  …Appellants.                                                                         

Smt. Shashi Kala Misra, Widow of

Late Shri Ram Raj Upendra Misra,

R/o Vill. Pipra Misra Tappa, Maeel Pargana,

Salemput Majhauli, Post Pipra Misra,

Distt. Deoria.                                          ….…Respondent.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Sri Rajendra  Singh, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Sri Sushil Kumar, Member.

Dr. U.V. Singh, Advocate for the appellants.

None for the respondent.

Date  8.7.2021

JUDGMENT

Per Mr. Sushil Kumar, Member: This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.5.1997 passed in complaint case no.36 of 1996, Shashi Kala Misra vs. Post Master General and another.

As per the allegations of the complaint, the complainant’s husband took an insurnace policy amounting Rs.2 lacs. This amount of policy shall be provided to the widow of the deceased Ram Raj Upendra Misra. She further alleged that her deceased husband took another insurance policy amounting Rs.10,000.00. The insured amount of this policy also be given to the complainant alongwith 18% interest.

Opposite parties while filing the written statement admitted this fact that the husband of the complainant decesed Ram Raj Upendra Misra has worked as Assistant Post Master in the Post Office at Deoria and he died in continuation of sservice of period on 26.10.1989. The opposite parties also admitted two insurance polices amounting Rs.2 lacs and Rs.10,000.00 respectively.

(2)

Upon considering the evidence and facts of the case the ld. District Consumer Forum, Deoria allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.20,205.00 alongwith interest @12% from 16.1.1996 to December, 1996.

Aggrieved by this judgment and order, the appellants filed this appeal on the ground that the relief which has been claimed by the complainant has already been settled and paid in August, 1995 itself. There is no deliberate delay on the party of the appellants, therefore, the appellants have commited no latches in their services. Hence, the order passed by the ld. District Consumer Forum is not sustainable.

We have heard the ld. Counsel for the appellants only since the respondent failes to appear before this Commission and perused the record.

The appellants moved a settlement document supported by affidavit which finds place on the record of this appeal as documents no.15 to 19, which reveals this fact that a settlement has occurred between the complainant and the appellants in full satisfaction. Therefore, now there is no need to comply with the order passed by the District Consumer Forum, Deoria. Hence, the appeal deserves to be allowed.

ORDER

Appeal is allowed and the judgment and order dated 15.5.1997 passed in complaint case no.36 of 1996 is hereby set aside.

Certified copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.   

                 (Rajendra Singh)                        (Sushil Kumar)    

                Presiding Member                            Member                   

Jafri PA II

Court 3