Kerala

Palakkad

CC/231/2012

K.M.Abdulkhader - Complainant(s)

Versus

Union of India - Opp.Party(s)

15 Jan 2013

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/231/2012
 
1. K.M.Abdulkhader
S/o. Mohammed Rawther, Kizhakkumuri house, Vandazhy PO, Alathur Taluk - 678 706
Palakkad
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Union of India
Represented by the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 033.
Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala
2. Post Master General
Calicut
Calicut
Kerala
3. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices
Palakkad Division
Palakkad
Kerala
4. Post Master
Vandazhi
Palakkad
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONARABLE MRS. Seena.H PRESIDENT
 HONARABLE MRS. Bhanumathi.A.K Member
 HONARABLE MRS. Preetha.G.Nair Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PALAKKAD, KERALA

Dated this the 15th day of January, 2013.


 

Present: Smt. Seena. H, President

: Smt. Preetha. G. Nair, Member

: Smt. Bhanumathi. A.K, Member Date of filing: 22/12/2012


 

CC /231/2012


 

K.M. Abdul Khadar

S/o. Mohammed Rawther, - Complainant

Kizhakkumuri house, Vandazhy P.O

Alathur Taluk, Palakkad – 678 706

( By Adv. V.K. Venugopalan)


 

Vs

1. Union of India represented by the

Chief Post Master General,

Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram

Pin – 695 033


 

2. Post Master General,

Calicut.


 

3. Senior Superintendent of Post offices,

Palakkad Division, Palakkad.

- Opposite parties

4. Post Master,

Vandazhi.

O R D E R


 

BY SMT. SEENA.H, PRESIDENT


 

Complaint in brief:-


 

Complainant purchased 37 Indira Vikas Patras issued by 3rd opposite party in the year 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999. Date of maturity of the above are in the years 2002,2003,2004 and 2005. Complainant has claimed for disbursement of the amount in the year 2007. Opposite parties did not disbursed the amount since the certificates were lost. Hence lawyer notice dtd. 12/03/2012 was caused for which opposite parties replied stating that the maturity value cannot be disbursed since the certificates are lost. Hence the complaint.

Complaint was posted for hearing on admission regarding limitation. Heard the complainant.

According to the complaint itself, the year maturity of the various IVP's – 2002,2003,2004 and 2005. Admittedly complainant has claimed the amount in the year 2007. Complaint has been filed after a lapse of 6 years. As per Sec 24(A) of Consumer Protection Act, complaint has to be filed within 2 years from the date of cause of action. No sufficient reason made out for condonation of delay for 6 years. No application for condonation of delay is filed. Issuance of lawyer notice will not extend the limitation period.


 

In view of the above discussions, we are of the view that the complaint is barred by limitation. Hence without going in to merits of the case, we dismiss the complaint.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 15th day of Janury, 2013.


 

Sd/-

Smt. Seena. H

President

 

Sd/-

Smt. Preetha.G.Nair

Member

 

Sd/-

Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K

Member

 

 
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Seena.H]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Bhanumathi.A.K]
Member
 
[HONARABLE MRS. Preetha.G.Nair]
Member

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.