FA.No.1133/2008 against CC.No.397/2008 District Consumer Forum-III, Hyderabad.

Between:

M/

Rep. by its Director Sri S/

O/o.1-1-790,

Gandhinagar, Hyderabad.

…Appellant/And

1.Mrs.Veena    Aged 57 yrs.

2.P.K.Amaresh, S/   Aged 65 yrs.

(Both are r/nd Floor, Temple View Apartments,

   Near Skandagiri Temple,    …Respondents/Complainants.

Counsel for the Appellant                  :

 Counsel for the Respondents           :  

QUORUM:  THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, HON’BLE PRESIDENT,

SMT.M.SHREESHA

AND

SRI G.BHOOPATHI REDDY, HON’BLE MALE MEMBER.

TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER,

TWO THOUSAND EIGHT.

Oral Order (Per

*******

1.         Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the record, we are of the opinion that the appeal can be disposed of at the stage of admission. 

2.         This is an appeal preferred by the opposite party against the order of the District Consumer Forum-III, Hyderabad,

3.         The case of the complainants in brief is that they have deposited a sum of Rs.7  The date of maturity is 06.04.2006.  It has also taken another Fixed Deposit Receipt for an amount of Rs.1  The date of maturity is 15.06.2006.  The opposite party had paid interest till maturity dates. It has paid Rs.10  So also in regard to second fixed deposit it had paid interest on 15.06.2006.  Though the Fixed Deposits had been matured, they were not paying the amounts even after issuing a legal notice on 10.04.2008.  Therefore, they claimed the amounts covered under the Fixed Deposit Receipts with interest and costs.

4.         Despite the fact that notices were issued, the opposite party did not receive them.  The covers were returned on the ground of ‘refusal’.  Thereupon, the opposite party was set 5.           complainants have filed affidavit along with documents, Exs.A.1 to A.7, the deposit receipts, etc. 

6.         The District Forum after considering the documentary evidence placed on record opined that the complainants had deposited amounts covered under Exs.A.1 and A.2.  When a   was issued for payment of the amount, the same was   Thereupon, a legal notice was sent under Ex.A.6, which was received by the opposite party under Ex.A.7.  There was no reply.  Since the facts mentioned above were not

7.           by the said decision, the opposite party preferred this appeal.  The contention of the opposite party/appellant herein is that the procedure under Sec.28-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was not followed with regard to service of notice. 

8.         The cover was returned with an endorsement of refusal.  Sec.28-A reads as follows:-

            “28-A.Service of notice, etc.:- (1) All notices required by this Act to be served shall be served in the manner hereinafter mentioned in sub-section (2).

            (2) The service of notices may be made by delivering or transmitting a copy thereof by registered post acknowledgement due addressed to opposite party against whom complaint is made or to the complainant by speed post or by such courier service as are approved by the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, or by any other means of transmission of documents (including FAX message).

            (3) When an acknowledgement or any other receipt purporting to be signed by the opposite party or his agent or by the complainant is received by the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, or postal article containing the notice is received back by such District Forum, State Commission or the National Commission, with an endorsement purporting to have been made by a postal employee or by any person authorized by the courier service to the effect that the opposite party or his agent or complainant had refused to take delivery of the postal article containing the notice or had refused to accept the notice by any other means specified in sub-section(2) when tendered or transmitted to him, the District Forum or the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, shall declare that the notice had been duly served on the opposite party or to the complainant:

                        Provided that where the notice was properly addressed, pre-paid and duly sent by registered post acknowledgement due, a declaration referred to in this sub-section shall be made notwithstanding the fact that the acknowledgement has been lost or mislaid, or for any other reason, has not been received by the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, within thirty days from the date of issue of notice .

            (4) All notices required to be served on an opposite party or to complainant shall be deemed to be sufficiently served, if addressed in the case of the opposite party to the place where business or profession is carried and in case of complainant, the place where such person actually and voluntarily resides.”      

We do not see any error either in appreciation of fact or law in this regard.  There are no merits in the appeal. 

9.         The appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission.  No cots.       

PRESIDENT               LADY MEMBER               MALE MEMBER

Dt