THE SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES, GHAZIABAD DIVISION GHAZIABAD (U.P) AND ANOTHER Vs. MODI (HUF) KARTA BRIG., M.K. MODI HOUSE NO. 471, SECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), has been filed by the Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices, Ghaziabad Division, Ghaziabad, U.P. and its Associate at Noida, the Opposite Parties in the Complaint, against the order, dated 27.01.2014, passed by the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Lucknow (for short "the State Commission") in First Appeal No. 804 of 2010. By the impugned order, the State Commission has affirmed the view taken by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Noida (for short "the District Forum") to the effect that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioners in not paying the maturity value of the accounts opened by the Complainant with them under the Monthly Income Scheme and consequently dismissed the Appeal.

(2.) The Appeal had been preferred by the Petitioners against the order, dated 09.04.2010, passed by the District Forum in Complaint No. 287 of 2009, filed by the Complainant. By the said order, the District Forum, had held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioners in not paying the maturity value of the Monthly Income Scheme accounts opened by the Complainant and consequently while partly allowing the Complaint had directed the Petitioners to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs. 46760/-, being the maturity value of account no.16217/-, and to calculate the total amount to be paid to the Complainant under Accounts No.16793, 16985 and 18456 up-to 10.05.2009 and to pay the same besides Rs. 1000/- as litigation expenses.

(3.) Being unsuccessful before the State Commission, in the afore-noted Appeal, the Petitioners are before us in the present Revision Petition.