Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Head Post Master Vs. Kishan Lal

Head Post Master vs Kishan Lal

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi Decided Feb 16, 2005
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1112473

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Appeal No. A-31 of 2005
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(1)(g) - Comparative Citation: 2005 (2) CPJ 637

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Head Post Master

Respondent

Kishan Lal

Excerpt

consumer protection act, 1986 - section 2(1)(g) - comparative citation: 2005 (2) cpj 637j.d. kapoor, president: 1. vide impugned order dated 1.12.2004 passed by district forum, the appellant has been directed to refund rs. 500/- to the respondent with 9% interest from the date when the amount was sent by the respondent by way of money order to one mr. phool singh, r/o 29/5, gali no. 13, vishwas nagar, shahdara, delhi and also to pay rs. 1,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service resulting in harassment to the respondent. 2. feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 3. we have perused the impugned order and find that the money order was returned as the address was not available at the given address. so much so as the sender was also not available at the given address in spite of six visits by the postman. we do not find any deficiency on the part of the appellant and maintain the order of only return the amount of rs. 500/- to the respondent and set aside the rest of the order. 4. fdr/bank guarantee/post office pass book, if any, deposited by the appellant be returned to the appellant forthwith under proper receipt. 5. a copy of this order, as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties, free of charge and also to the concerned district forum and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. appeal allowed.

Full Judgment

J.D. Kapoor, President:

1. Vide impugned order dated 1.12.2004 passed by District Forum, the appellant has been directed to refund Rs. 500/- to the respondent with 9% interest from the date when the amount was sent by the respondent by way of Money Order to one Mr. Phool Singh, R/o 29/5, Gali No. 13, Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi and also to pay Rs. 1,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service resulting in harassment to the respondent.

2. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

3. We have perused the impugned order and find that the Money Order was returned as the address was not available at the given address. So much so as the sender was also not available at the given address in spite of six visits by the Postman. We do not find any deficiency on the part of the appellant and maintain the order of only return the amount of Rs. 500/- to the respondent and set aside the rest of the order.

4. FDR/Bank Guarantee/Post Office Pass Book, if any, deposited by the appellant be returned to the appellant forthwith under proper receipt.

5. A copy of this order, as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties, free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to the Record Room.

Appeal allowed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial