Per Mr.S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
This appeal takes an exception to the order dated 21/08/2010 passed in consumer complaint No.29/2009 Mr.Vasant Rajgor V/s. The Director of Small Savings, Govt. of Maharashtra & Anr. by District Consumer Forum, South Mumbai. Consumer complaint was partly allowed. However, not satisfied with the same, org. complainant has preferred this appeal. Undisputedly, in the recurring deposit account No.1611719 and 16117302 were opened on 18/01/2005. The later account is in the name of son of complainant, namely, Master Sagar V. Rajgor and earlier was in the name of daughter of the complainant, namely, Ms. Shruti V. Rajgor. Both are not parties to this consumer dispute/complaint. Further, respondents/O.Ps. are the officials and not the department itself which is a service provider. This goes to the root of the matter. Apart from this, one could see that what has been actually credited in the account is directed to be refunded by the Forum below. What is not credited in the account by the alleged agent, who is not party to this proceeding, Post Office cannot be blamed. It is alleged that any lapse or omissions on the part of authorised agent of the department, vicarious liability could be fastened on the department. As earlier pointed out, the department is not made party to the proceedings. Considering overall situation, we find that a case for enhancement, prima-facie, is not made out by the appellant. There is no reason to alter or rectify the order as desired by the appellant. Thus, we find the appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order :- -: ORDER :- 1. Appeal stands dismissed in limine. 2. No order as to costs. 3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties. |
