P.S. SAWHNEY vs NATIONAL MUSEUM

FEELING aggrieved of the impugned order dated 30.8.2004 passed by the District Forum whereby the complaint of the appellant for the purchase of replicas from the respondent institute which is National Museum at the pre-revised price was dismissed; the appellant has preferred this appeal.

THE main controversy arising in this appeal is whether the respondent was well within its right to accept the payment of Rs. 2,500/- towards the price of the replicas in cash as the appellant insisted for making the payment either by way of cheque or by way of demand draft. THE demand draft was out-station draft. THE delay in not sending the replicas against the demand draft resulted in the revision of the price of the replicas. Though the appellant has accused the respondent for indulging in unfair trade practice but it appears that the main grouse of the appellant was with regard to the deficiency in service inasmuch as that the payment by way of demand draft was a valid tender and no authority could have refused to accept the same. In our view it is the prerogative of the provider of service to lay down the condition as to what kind of cheques or demand draft would be accepted. In the instant case the respondent had asked for the local cheque or local demand draft whereas the appellant forwarded the outstation demand draft. In no way or by any stretch of imagination such a mode of payment as insisted by a provider of service can come within the mischief of unfair trade practice or deficiency in service.

Had the appellant issued a local demand draft the grievance was genuine as payment by demand draft is as good as cash payment though at the same time respondent could have taken the plea that in that case they were required to make arrangement for collection of demand draft amount for which they had to incur additional expenses. Perhaps it was for this reason that arrangement for payment by way of cash was made to avoid employment of additional staff.

BE that as it may in the instant case the respondent cannot be held guilty either for deficiency in service or for unfair trade practice on account of refusal of outstation demand draft. The appeal is dismissed in limine being devoid of merit. The FDR, if any, deposited by the appellant returned forthwith after completing necessary formalities.

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