A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

 ATHYDERABAD.

C. C. 56/2008.

Between:

N. Surendra Sai

S/o. N. R. Paramahamsa

Age: 39 years,

R/o. FlatParamountTowers

Red Hills, Hyderabad-500 004.1. The Chief Post Master General

A.P. Circle, Dak Sadan, Abids

Hyderabad, A.P.-500 001

2. The Post Master

Tenali H.O.

Tenali-522 201

3. The Sub-Post Master

Tenali Bazar

Tenali-522 201.

Counsel for the Appellant:                         

Counsel for the Respondent:                     

QUORUM:

FRIDAY, THIS THE FOURTEENTH 

Oral Order: (Per Hon’ble Justice D. Appa Rao, President)

                                                                    Heard the learned counsel for the complainant   

           The case of the complainant in brief is that his mother late Smt. N.Kamala and his grand mother Smt. S. Venkata Subbamma during their life time deposited a sum of Rs.18,000/- with       There was another account opened by them along with               

         He        

Admittedly when the complainant filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, the Dist. Forum directed the respondents to pay Rs. 22,530/- along with interest @ 12% p.a., from 17.5.2001 till the date of payment besides    A.P. State Commission.         

“the entry recorded in the column of nominee is struck off with two vertical lines albeit without any enquiry. It is thus evident that some official/officer of the department which had the custody of the file deliberately scored out the entry in the column relating to nominee. This must have been done with the sole object of defeating the legitimate claim of the first respondent.”.

Further it was observed that

On the basis of the above discussion, we hold that the orders under challenge do not suffer from any legal error warranting interference by this Court.”

            A.P. Circle,Hyderabad  

                       to be provided as required.      

         We may also state that                            rd

                Cal. allegation         Cal.

         Lastly, the civil action must have caused damage to the plaintiff.       

           interference with the    These are as follows:

                        rd         

Learned author further opined that the public authorities acting in violation of   behavior   

Learned author referring the decision 

It was held                         

Where it is found that exercise of discretion was     

Prior to the 1993 amendments, there was no specific power with the consumer fora      

              A separate complaint for solitary relief of