POST MASTER POST OFFICE V/S PREM CHAND JAIN - Consumer Court Case

NCDRC

RP/693/2004

PREM CHAND JAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

POST MASTER POST OFFICE - Opp.Party(s)

INPERSON

08 Mar 2005

ORDER

Date of Filing: 16 Feb 2004
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI.Revision Petition(RP) No. RP/693/2004
(Against the Order dated 29/11/2003 in Appeal No. 779/2003 of the State Commission Chhattisgarh)

1. PREM CHAND JAINJAIN TRADING COMPANY MAHAVIR SWANI CHOWK KAWARDHA C.G.						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
1. POST MASTER POST OFFICEKAWARDHA DISTRICT KAWARDHA C.G. 2. DIRECTOR. SANCHALNALAYA A.P BACHAT EVAM RAJYA LOTTERIES M.P GOVERNMENT JAHANGEERABAD . BHOPAL M.P3. INDIAN GOVERNMENT THROUGH SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT NEWE DELHI DELHI						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HONORABLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.GUPTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHONORABLE MR. S.K. NAIK ,MEMBER

For the Appellant :

For the Respondent :

Dated : 08 Mar 2005

ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

Despite notice being sent by registered post on 22.05.2008 neither the petitioner nor anyone on his behalf is present today.

Petitioner/complainant purchased 6 year NSCs valued at Rs. 6,000/- on 11.11.85 and valued at Rs. 15,000/- on 27.10.1986 from the respondent/opposite party No. 1. These NSCs were purchased in the name of M/s Jain Traders. Maturity value of the NSCs purchased on 11.11.1985 was Rs. 12,090/- while those purchased on 27.10.1985 was Rs. 30,225/-. It is not in dispute that the principal amount of these NSCs had been paid by respondent No. 1 to the petitioner on 13.7.1993. Dispute centre around the payment of the balance amount towards interest. As may be seen from the order passed by fora below, plea taken on behalf of the respondent no. 1 was that the complaint filed on 28.07.2001 was time barred and purchase of NSCs in the name of M/s Jain Traders was in violation of Rule 4 of National Savings Certificate Rules, 1981. On limitation, the State Commission was of the view that cause of action accrued for filing the complaint on 13.07.1993 and the complaint instituted on 28.07.2001 was barred by limitation. It was also of the view that purchase of NSCs in the name of M/s Jain Traders was in violation of the said Rules of 1981 and petitioner was, therefore, entitled to the payment of principal amount. On given facts we do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the order passed by State Commission warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction u/s 21(b) of CP Act, 1986. Dismissed.

......................JK.S.GUPTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................S.K. NAIKMEMBER