NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/951/2010

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SUNDER LAL DAGA - Opp.Party(s)

MR. RAJESHWAR SINGH

30 Apr 2010

ORDER

Date of Filing: 02 Mar 2010

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/951/2010
(Against the Order dated 12/08/2009 in Appeal No. 1828/2007 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. RAILWAY DEPARTMENT & ANR.Chief Commercial Manager, (Refund) Railway Department, Station Building, Second Floor, N.D.C.R. BuildingNew DelhiDelhi2. STATIION SUPERINTENDENT, RAILWAY DEPARTMENTKolayatBikanerRajasthan ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. SUNDER LAL DAGAThrough its Power of Attorney Holder Sh. Mool Chand Daga, E-27, Khajanchi MarketBikanerRajasthan ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GUPTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. BATTA ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 30 Apr 2010
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.

Petitioner – railways does not dispute that amount of Rs.1,11,911/- deposited by the respondent – complainant is lying with it. By the letter dated 25th January 1996, even the Senior Divisional Manager, Northern Railway, Bikaner had recommended refund of this excess freight paid by the respondent. Order of the State Commission is for refund of the said amount with interest @ 6% per annum to the respondent. Shri Singh states that the petitioner – railways was inclined to refund the money but the respondent did not come forward to collect it. There is delay of 100 days in filing revision petition. In our view, the grounds disclosed in condonation application to condone this delay are hardly convincing. In this backdrop we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the State Commission in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petition is therefore, dismissed. Aforesaid amount with interest will be remitted by the petitioner – railways to the respondent within six weeks. DASTI.


......................JK.S. GUPTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................JR.K. BATTAMEMBER