AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE necessary and requisite facts leading to the filing of this present action may in brevity be stated.
ONE Dr. S. Jeyakumar, figuring as complainant instituted proceedings by way of complaint in O.P. No. 569/92 before this Commission impleading, (1) The General Manager, Singapore Airlines Ltd., Airline House, Airline Road, Singapore; and (2) Manager, Singapore Airlines, Anna Salai, Madras - 2, as opposite parties claiming compensation in a specific sum alleging certain deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. This Commission by its order dated 13.9.1993 directed the opposite parties to pay compensation in a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the complainant. No direction for payment of costs was issued in view of the arbitrary claim made by the complainant. There was also no direction for the amount of this compensation of Rs. 15,000/- to be paid within a specified time.
It appears the complainant Dr. S. Jeyakumar filed First Appeal No. 554/94 before the National Commission.
DURING the pendency of the appeal, it appears he had also filed the present action under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 [For short, "the Act"]. When the present action is pending before this Commission, the First Appeal No. 554/94, it appears, got dismissed on 11.4.2000. The present action had been initiated in person by Dr. S. Jeyakumar without engaging a Counsel of his choice.
NOTWITHSTANDING the fact that there was no time limit specified by this Commission in its order dated 13.9.1993 directing the opposite parties to pay the amount of compensation of Rs. 15,000/-, yet the opposite parties, with all due diligence took steps to comply with the order of this Commission by sending a registered letter dated 25.10.1993 with acknowledgement due to the complainant requesting him to collect the sum of Rs. 15,000/- as per the order of this Commission. The complainant, it appears, did not at all react or respond to such a letter. A second letter was despatched by the opposite parties on 7.6.1994 to the complainant reminding him that Cheque No. 251827 dated 26.10.1993 for Rs. 15,000/- as per the order of this Commissin was still not realised and to collect the same. Even to this letter, it appears the complainant did not react or respond. After the dismissal of the appeal before the National Commission, it appears the complainant came to the office of the Counsel for the opposite party in person during the end of February, 2000, and stated that he would receive the cheque. The cheque was stated to have been made ready on 8.3.2000 however the complainant did not come to receive the cheque. It is further stated that further effort to contact the complainant was futile.
THE opposite parties having failed in their attempt to make payment of Rs. 15,000/- as ordered by this Commission to the complainant and left with no option, came before this Commission and filed a memo alongwith the Fixed Deposit Receipt in the name of the Registrar, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, in the account of E.P. No. 43/99 in O.P. No. 569/92 praying for recording full satisfaction of the judgment and decree dated 13.9.1993 in O.P. No. 569/92 on the file of this Commission.
ON the face of the situation presented before us by the opposite parties, there is no other go for us except to record full and final satisfaction of the order of this Commission dated 13.9.1993 in O.P. No. 569/92 and we accordingly do so. It is however open to Dr. S. Jeyakumar, the complainant, to file the necessary and requisite application before this Commission for the withdrawal of the amount. The E.P. is thus disposed of. No costs. E.P. disposed of.