AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 232 wordsTHE appeal is directed against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Madras, dated 30.4.93 in OP No. 850/92. THE Opposite Party is the Appellant.
THE Complainant has given a telegram from Mambalam to Rajapalayam to his father informing of the maturity of his daughter Parvathi. It has been delivered to the addressee with the message that Parvathi expired. Consequently, a large number relatives came from Rajapalayam and the Complainant was damnified. THE Opposite Party pleaded that it was an accidental occurrence and not due to negligence or reckless working. THE District Forum found that there was deficiency in service and awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 5,000/-. Hence this appeal. The telegraphic message conveyed by the Complainant was that his daughter Parvathi attained maturity and the message actually conveyed by the Department was that Parvathi expired. This is a clear case of negligence. There can be no alibi on the part of the Opposite Party.
The only question is to the amount of compensation awarded. The District Forum has awarded Rs. 5,000/- as compensation. We are inclined that a sum of Rs. 2,500/- is sufficient to meet the ends of justice.
IN the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the order of the compensation is reduced to Rs. 2,500/-. IN other respects, the order of the District Forum shall stand. Appeal partly allowed.