Tribunals and Commissions(2004) 11 NCDRC CK 0010

U.O.I.. vs RANJANA VIJAI

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 1 November 2004 · Citation: 2005 2 CPC 252 : 2005 2 CPR 87 : 2005 3 CPJ 673

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.A.A.Khan , Sushma Tanwar J.
RESULT
Appeal dismissed

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 318 words
1.

HEARD. Late Shri G.K. Vijai, the deceased husband of Mrs. Ranjana Vijai, the complainant respondent, had purchased a National Saving Certificate of the face value of Rs. 18,500/- from the appellant department Before the arrival of the date of maturity of the said certificate, Shri Vijai died on 11.11.1990. The respondent submitted her application in Form S.B. 84 to the appellant department on 28.2.1991 for payment of the amount of the NSC to her along with benefits thereunder. Although the Sub-Post Master (SLG), Dada Bari, Kota, wherefrom the certificate has been obtained by the deceased husband of the respondent, recommended to Sub-Post Master, Madhura Refinery Nagar, Madhura, U.P., where the respondent appears to be living at the relevant time, for payment of the amount of the certificate to the respondent but that was not done though the date of maturity of the certificate had also expired on 9.12.1993. The respondent thereupon filed her complaint before the D.F., Kota which has decreed her complaint directing the appellant to pay the amount of the certificate as on 9.12.193 with interest @ 15% p.a. and cost of litigation at Rs. 1,000/-. Hence this appeal by the appellant.

2.

AT the very outset we were informed that the appellant has already made the payment of the decretal amount to the respondent on 13.3.1996 vide cheque No. B 241709. In view of the fact that the appellant had offered no reasonable explanation for not making the payment of the certificate to the widow of the deceased certificate holder, the D.F. rightly held the appellant as having rendered deficient services to the respondent.

In view of the fact that the decretal amount has already been paid to the respondent, the impugned order calls for no interference by us. In the result the appeal is dismissed with cost at Rs. 1,000/- which shall be realised from the erring and delinquent Sub-Post Master. Appeal dismissed.