ANITA AGGARWAL Vs. DEEPESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revision petitions arise out of single order of State Commission; hence, decided by common order.

(2.) R.P. No. 4272 of 2007 has been filed by OP NO. 2 / Petitioner, R.P. No. 632 of 2008 has been filed by OP NO. 1/petitioner and R.P. No. 656 of 2008 has been filed by OP NO. 3/petitioner against the order dated 07.11.2007 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 07/562 Ms. Anita Agarwal Vs. Shri Deepesh Kumar & Ors., in Appeal No. 7/617 The Post Master Vs. Shri Deepesh Kumar & Ors. and in Appeal No. 7/684 The Regional Director, National Savings Organization Vs. Shri Deepesh Kumar & Ors. by which, while dismissing appeals, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/respondent no. 1 through his father and natural guardian Shri Sohan Lal intended to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- in the MIS Scheme. Father of complainant handed over Rs.1,00,000/- to OP No. 2 being lawful agent of OP NO. 3. OP NO. 2 issued 20 cash receipts of Rs.5,000/- each in the name of complainant and asked complainant to collect passbook shortly. Passbook was never supplied inspite of repeated requests. It was further submitted that OP NO. 2 was appointed as agent by OP No. 3, Regional Director, National Savings. Complainant neither received passbook nor money was refunded to him. Alleing deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. OP NO. 1 resisted complaint and submitted that agents of MIS Scheme works under supervision and control of OP NO. 3 and OP NO. 2 did not deposit amount with OP No. 1 and there is no deficiency on the part of OP NO. 1 and prayed for dismissal of complaint. OP No. 2 also resisted complaint and denied receipt of Rs.1,00,000/- and issuance of receipts in favor of the complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint. OP No. 3 resisted complaint, but admitted that OP NO. 2 was lawful agent of OP No. 3. It was further submitted that FIR has been registered against OP No. 2 and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing some of the parties allowed complaint and directed OPs to refund Rs.1,00,000/- with all available benefits jointly and severally and to pay Rs.8,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation. Appeals filed by OPs were dismissed by learned State Commission vide impugned order against which, these revision petitions have been filed.