STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

First Appeal No  :      314 of 2015

Date of Institution:      01.04.2015

Date of Decision :       21.04.2015

Arun Kumar s/o Sh. Rati Ram, Resident of Village Bhallout, Tehsil and District Rohtak at present Government Primary School, Kot Hathin, Girls Government Primary School, Kot Hathin, District Palwal.

                                      Appellants

Versus

Blazeflash Couriers Limited, New Anaj Mandi, State Bank of Patiala, c/o Lakhan Patase wala, Hodal, District Palwal, through its proprietor.

                                      Respondent

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:               Shri Anil Kumar Gahlawat, Advocate for appellant.

                                                   O R D E R

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

This complainant’s appeal is directed against the order dated December 16^th, 2014, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Palwal, seeking a substantial enhancement of the relief granted.

2.      Arun Kumar-Complainant applied for a plot to Housing Board, Haryana, Awas Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula. He sent his application through courier vide receipt dated July 24^th, 2012 (Exhibit C-7). The closing date for receiving the applications in the office of Housing Board was July 26^th, 2012. The courier article was received at the destination on July 28^th, 2012. Since, the application of the complainant was received after the due date, so it was not entertained by the Housing Board. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent-opposite party, the complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking compensation of Rs.5.00 lacs.

3.      The District Forum vide impugned order accepted complaint and issued direction to the respondent-opposite party to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the appellant.

4.      Learned counsel for the appellant-complainant has urged that amount of compensation awarded is on lower side.

5.      Having taken into consideration facts of the case and the evidence led by the complainant, this Commission is of the view that the amount awarded to the complainant is just, reasonable and there is no scope for enhancement.

6.      Hence, the appeal is dismissed.

CL