PANNI DEVI Vs. L I C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the opposite party who is petitioner before us. It appears that the petitioner runs a dry cleaning shop. Certain clothes were given by the complainant for dry -cleaning which were lost by the petitioner. On a complaint filed by the respondent,District Forum granted a sum of Rs. 10,050/ - towards the costs of garments, Rs. 5,000/ - as compensation and Rs. 500/ - as costs. Appeal against this order filed by the petitioner/opposite party before the State Commission was also dismissed. It is submitted before us that the State Commission did not take into account the conditions on the back of the receipt issued while giving the garments for dry cleaning purpose. We have put it to Mr. Mishra whether the receipt was signed by the complainant. Obviously, the answer is negative but even in common parlance when a customer gives his garments for dry -cleaning, the receipt is not signed by the customer and as a matter of fact nobody reads the conditions on the back of the receipt. There is a concurrent finding of fact recorded both by the District Forum and the State Commission. Revision Petition is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.