Northern Railway, Railway Station, Chandigarh, through its Manager @ Station Superintendent, Railway Station, 

……Appellant/Opposite Party

V e r s u s

Balbir Singh, R/o H.No. 3197, Sector 15-D, Chandigarh.

 Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

BEFORE:  

Argued by:

PER JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.), PRESIDENT

               order dated 05.02.2014, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh (hereinafter to be called as the District Forum only), vide which, it accepted the complaint, filed by the complainant (now respondent) and directed the Opposite Party (now appellant), as under:-

“For the reasons recorded above, we are of the opinion that the complaint must succeed. Therefore, the complaint is allowed. The OP is directed as under:-

i)     To pay an amount of Rs.One Lakh being the value of the items lost;

ii)    To make payment of an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing him mental agony and physical harassment.

iii)    To pay a sum of Rs.5000/- to the complainant towards litigation cost.

This order shall be complied with by the OP within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, the OP shall be liable to pay the awarded amount of Rs.1,10,000/- along with interest @12% p.a. from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 05.11.2013 till realization, besides paying litigation cost, as aforesaid.”

2.            

3.           4.           

5.            

6.           

7.            

8.           

9.           

10.         

^{11.            Otherwise also, it is settled principle of law, that every lis should normally be decided, on merits, by affording an opportunity to the parties of putting forth their version and leading evidence. When the hyper-technicalities, and the substantial justice, are pitted against each other, then the latter shall prevail over the former. The procedure, is, in the ultimate, the hand-maid of justice, meant to advance the cause thereof, than to thwart the same. In our considered opinion, it is a fit case, in which the order of the District Forum, deserves to be set aside, and the case is required to be remanded back to it, for fresh decision, on merits, in accordance with law.}

^12.             

^13.              

^14.             

^15.             

^16.             

^17.             

Pronounced.

24/04/2014

Sd/-

[JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.)]

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

(DEV RAJ)

MEMBER

Rg