1^st Additional Bench

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No.380 of 2019

Date of institution : 26.06.2019

Order reserved on : 30.06.2020

Date of decision : 09.07.2020

1. Unique Identification Authority of India, GOI (Government of

India) having its head office at Bangla Sahib Road, Behind Kali

Mandir, Gole Market, New Delhi-110001, through its Principal

Officer/Authorized Signatory.

2. Unique Identification Authority of India, GOI (Government of

India) having its Regional Office at SCO 139-141, 3^rd and 4^th

Floor, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh 160017, through its Principal

Officer/Authorized Signatory.

….Appellants/Opposite Parties

Versus

Sehajpreet Singh aged 3 years (date of birth 29.01.2016) minor son of

S. Jatinder Singh, resident of H.No.1328, Main Bazar, Chowk

Pragdass, Amritsar at present at House No.24, Baba Budhi Ji Nagar,

Tarn

Taran

Road,

Amritsar,

through

his

real

father/natural

guardian/next friend S. Jatinder Singh who has no interest adverse to

the minor. 9915498150.

….Respondent/Complainant

First

Appeal

against

the

order

dated

27.05.2019 passed by District Consumer

Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar.

Quorum:-

Mr. Rajinder Kumar Goyal, Presiding Member

Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member

Present:-

For the appellants

: Sh. Vaneet Mittal, Advocate

For the respondent : Ex-parte

KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER

This appeal has been filed by the appellants/opposite

parties (in short as “OPs”) against the order dated 27.05.2019 passed

by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar (in short,

“the

District

Forum”),

whereby

the

complaint

filed

by

the

First Appeal No.380 of 2019

2

respondent/complainant, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection

Act, 1986 (in short, “the Act”), was partly allowed and OPs were

directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.2000/- and further to

pay Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses.

Facts of the Complaint

2.

The brief facts of the case are that complainant Sehajpreet

Singh (minor) filed the complaint through his father Jatinder Singh,

being natural guardian. The allegations were that since the Aadhar

card of the complainant has not yet been prepared and issued by OPs,

as such the complainant alongwith his father approached the

concerned office of the OP at Amritsar and requested for preparing

and issuing the Aadhar card in his name and submitted all the

requisite documents to the office and also deposited the requisite fee

of Rs.50/-. OP issued him enrolment No. 2189/54885/29835 dated

15.12.2017. As such complainant hired the services of the OPs by

depositing fee of Rs.50/-, as a consumer as defined under the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986. On 26.01.2018, father of complainant

received message from OP no.1 that applied adhar card has been

rejected by the Authorities. Father of complainant asked OP no.1

about the details of rejection. OP no.1 replied that the Adhar Card

already exists in the name of complainant and issued on 31.12.2015 at

16:32:34 hours, bearing no.2029 24037 00092. That Adhar Card was

issued by OPs much before the date of birth of complainant. The

father of complainant requested OPs to do the needful, as he never

applied for Adhar card in the name of his son, but OPs flatly refused to

First Appeal No.380 of 2019

3

do the same. The complainant prayed that OPs be directed to prepare

and issue the Adhar Card in favor of complainant immediately and to

pay compensation and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.

Defence of the Opposite Parties

3.

Upon notice, OPs appeared on 20.05.2019, through Sh.

Raj Kumar Section Officer of OPs and also brought the Aadhar Card of

Sehajpreet Singh after making the necessary correction and handed

over the same to the father of the complainant Sh.Jatinder Singh. OPs

did not file any reply.

Evidence of the Parties and Finding of the District Forum

4.

In

Click Here to Read the rest of this document