1.       Heard Mr. C.K.Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/ Postal Department on limitation petition as well as on merits.

2.       On limitation, Mr. Jha submitted that due to official process there was delay of about nine months in filing this appeal.

3.       In the limitation petition absolutely vague and general statements have been made. It is true that liberal approach is taken in condoning the delay but the delay has to be explained properly, but there is no satisfactory explanation for the delay at all.

4.       On merits, Mr. Jha assailed the impugned judgement on various grounds.

5.       It appears that the complainant/ respondent filed the present complaint case alleging that he had sent his application for LPG Distributorship through speed post on 26.11.2010 but it reached the concern office on 3.12.2010 due to which his application was rejected causing immense loss to him.

6.     The Postal Department appeared before the learned District Forum but did not file any written statement or written note of argument.

         The learned District Forum has interalia held that through their letter the Postal Department admitted all the allegations of delayed delivery as alleged but did not explain the cause of delay and therefore delay of about  four days in delivery of the speed post article was established from the documents filed by the parties. Accordingly it held that the consignment which was to be delivered within 72 Hrs. from the date of post i.e. 29.11.2010 was delivered after seven days causing harassment and mental agony and such delay was negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the Postal Department, accordingly the Postal Department was directed to pay Rs. 5000/- to the complainant as compensation.

7.       The learned District Forum has recorded correct findings on the basis of the materials placed before it. In our opinion, no grounds are made out for interference with the impugned judgement.

8.       It has already been held that there is no satisfactory explanation at all for condoning the long delay of about nine months in filing this appeal.

9.       In the result this appeal is dismissed both on the grounds of limitation as well as on merits.

          Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.