BEOFRE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 120 of 2011
DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 28.02.2011
DATE OF ORDER: - 29.01.2016
Uttam Kumar Singh son of Shri Hira Parshad Singh, resident of Kale Narpat Nagar, Dhaya Kundal, District Samastipur, Bihar.
……………Complainant.
VERSUS
Proprietor, Balram Garg Firm Akash Ganga Courier Limited, Aggarwal Agency, Shop No. 21, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani.
………….. Opposite Party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT
BEFORE :- Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Shri Balraj Singh, Member
Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member
Present:- Shri Bajrang Vats, Advocate for complainant.
OP exparte.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainant in brief, is that he had sent a Form for Bihar Public Service Commission to his friend Rajiv Kumar at his address Mujafarnagar (Bihar), through the opposite party but the same has not been delivered to him. The complainant alleged that he visited to the office of OP many times but to no avail. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the opposite party, he had to suffer mental agony ,physical harassment and financial losses. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP and as such he had to file the present complaint.
2. Opposite party in his reply has denied the allegations of the complainant. It has been alleged by opposite party that at the request of the complainant his envelop was asked to be returned and the same was received back by the opposite party, but the complainant did not take back his envelop from the opposite party, with the bad intention to snatch the money from the opposite party. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. In order to make out his case, the counsel for complainant has placed on record Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-5 alongwith supporting affidavit.
4. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsel for the complainant.
5 Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the complainant had sent a Form for Bihar Public Service Commission to his friend Rajiv Kumar at his address Mujafarnagar (Bihar), through the opposite party but the same has not been delivered to him.
6. Opposite party in his reply has denied the allegations of the complainant. It has been alleged by opposite party that at the request of the complainant his envelop was asked to be returned and the same was received back by the opposite party, but the complainant did not take back his envelop from the opposite party, with the bad intention to snatch the money from the opposite party.
7. We have gone through the record carefully. The complainant in Para 5 of his complaint has stated that the complainant demanded back his Form from the opposite party, but the opposite party refused to return his Form. We are enable to understand why the Form of Bihar Public Service Commission was sent by the complainant to his friend, instead of sending it in the pre-addressed envelop supplied by the Bihar Public Service Commission with the application Form as mentioned in Para 6 of Annexure C-4.
8. The complainant has failed to adduce any cogent evidence in support of his pleadings. The complaint of the complainant is devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copies of the order be sent to both the parties, free of costs and file be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 29.01.2016. (Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Ansuya Bishnoi), (Balraj Singh),
Member. Member.
