SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICESNT Vs. MOHINUDDINOPPOSITE PARTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the judgment and order dated 30.1.1996 passed by District Consumer Forum, Hamirpur in Complaint Case No. 16/1995.

(2.) WE have heard Dr. Udai Veer Singh, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri R.K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant and have perused the entire record carefully.

(3.) MR . R.K. Gupta on the other hand submitted that the evasive reply and the delaying steps were taken by the Post Office which makes out a case of deficiency in service and thus it was argued that the impugned judgment and order is not liable to be assailed. We have given out anxious consideration over the respective part of the argument but we are impressed that in the instant case there was no inaction on the part of the Post Office/appellant and it was the obligation of the complainant to furnish the complete details as desired in Form 15 -1 along with the postal address and in the process being complied with certain delay took place which by no stretch of imagination could be termed as deficiency of service. Obviously the District Forum has committed illegality and the impugned judgment and order is not liable to be maintained.