Kerala

StateCommission

A/10/157

Sr. Suprintendent of Posts - Complainant(s)

Versus

Santhosh Kumar.A.K - Opp.Party(s)

21 Jun 2010

ORDER

First Appeal No. A/10/157
(Arisen out of Order Dated 10/12/2009 in Case No. CC 20/08 of District Kottayam)
1. Sr. Suprintendent of Posts ...........Appellant(s)

Versus
1. Santhosh Kumar.A.K ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE :
HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU PRESIDENT
PRESENT :

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.

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

 

APPEAL No. 157/2010

 

JUDGMENT DATED:21-06-2010

 

 

PRESENT:

 

 

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU    :   PRESIDENT

 

 

Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,

Kottayam Divn; Kottayam.                                  : APPELLANT

 

(Authorised Rep: Sri.R.P.Sandeep)

 

            Vs.

Santhoshkumar.A.K,

Aryamkombil House,                                             : RESPONDENT

Monipally.P.O, Kottayam.

I

 

     JUDGMENT

 

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT

 

 

The appellants are the opposite parties/Postal Authorities in CC.20/08 in the file of CDRF, Kottayam.  The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- as compensation and Rs.5000/- as cost.  The allegation is with respect to the delayed delivery of the letter addressed to the complainant from VSSC, Employment Exchange proposing the complainant’s candidature for the post of ‘Technician-A’ as per the letter dispatched to 26-02-2007.  Complainant was directed to furnish copies of certificates etc on or before 9-3-2007.  The letter dispatched on 26-02-2007 reached the complainant on 12-03-2007 which is beyond the last date stipulated in the letter.

2. Opposite parties had disputed liability and has also relied on Sec.6 of the Indian Post Office Act 1898.  It is also mentioned that enquiries conducted revealed that there was no laches.

3. Evidence adduced consisted of the proof affidavit of the complainant and Exts.A1 and A2.  The complainant also summoned and examined the Superintendent of Post Offices, Kottayam Division and Post Mistress of Monippally Post office as PWs 1 and 2 respectively.

4. We find that the opposite parties have not produced any record as to the alleged enquiry conducted.  The Forum below has noted that it was brought out that the letter was delivered with a delay of 15 days.  We find that the Sec.6 of the Indian Post Office Act will not apply to instances where there is clear deficiency of service.  We find that there is no patent illegality in the order of the Forum.

Appeal is dismissed in-limine.

Office will forward the copy of this order to the Forum urgently.

 

 

JUSTICE K.R. UDAYABHANU:   PRESIDENT

 

VL.

 

PRONOUNCED :
Dated : 21 June 2010

[HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU]PRESIDENT