SUNDER VATI vs COMMAND OFFICER

THIS is an appeal against the order dated 12.8.1996 passed by District Forum, Bahraich in complaint case No. 14/96.

WE have heard learned Counsel for the appellant. The brief facts of the case stated are that the husband of the complainant was upholster in the field workshop platoon, and during the period of service he died. Succession certificate was obtained on his death with respect to the dues. The complainant sent papers for family pension and other dues to the command officer of the field workshop platoon. The opposite party No. 1 contested the case, and stated that the complainant is not wife of the deceased. Complainant Nos. 2 and 3 are not her sons. Actually, the wife is one Smt. Sundervati Devi and the sons Sri Mithlesh Kumar and Vinod Kumar r/o of Gram Fatehpur, Post Titheria Ranipur, Tehsil Bhinga, District Bahraich. The pension and other dues have been paid to them and the complainants are not consumers. This fact was also communicated to the complainant vide letter dated 7.8.1992. In reply to his notice that payments have already been made to one Smt. Sundervati Devi and this letter was duly received by the complainant. The opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 also filed written statement taking the same defence.

We have heard the Counsels for the parties and perused the judgment of the District Forum. According to record it is clear that the complainant had already been told by the opposite party that the pension is paid to Smt. Sundervati Devi and other arrears have also been paid to her. It was further stated that the case is in execution stage. The District Forum also imposed a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation on account of facts that the opposite party No. 1 had been put to harassment who has to come from Ladakh.

AGGRIEVED against the order passed by the District Forum the complainant came in appeal. Counsel for the appellant has also argued that an execution case has been filed directing the complainant Smt. Sundervati to pay a sum of Rs. 100 and one month simple imprisonment on account of failing to comply with the order dated 12.8.1996.

ACCORDING to the Counsel for the appellant this order has been passed on the basis of the documents which were not exhibited. It is a matter which is between employee and employer. The duties to be performed by the opposite party No. 1 who is the respondent in this case are statutory duties and hence, the complainants do not come within the definition of the consumer as defined by 2(1)(d) of the C.P.A., 1986. Moreover, It has been clearly mentioned in the order that as per the papers dues have been already paid to some other lady. Smt. Sundervati who is r / o of another address in the same District. In such cases the District Forum is not authorised to adjudicate as to who is the rightful person to get the dues, etc. As is the complaints between the two ladies about the title to get the benefits of retirements, this matter can be resolved by another Forum other than the District Forum. Therefore, the complainant''s case was not maintainable before the District Forum. Learned Counsel for the appellant further states that the lady is a widow and sympathetic view is to be taken and costs to be quashed. We may mention here that the opposite party No. 1 has come right from Ladakh to Bahraich to file the case. Opposite party No. 1 is a military person whose duty is to put constant vigil on the border. Therefore, the complaint has been filed before the District Forum which has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The opposite party has been unnecessarily harassed for which the opposite party must be compensated.

KEEPING in view the facts of the case we feel that a sum of Rs. 5,000/- is somewhat on a higher side and we reduce it to a sum of Rs. 2,000/-. Let Rs. 2,000/- be paid by means of a local Pay Order/Demand Draft of a nationalised Bank within a period of six weeks drawn in the name of opposite party No. 1 and deposited before the District Forum concerned within a period of two months, failing which the order passed by the District Forum, on 9.2.1999 in the execution case No. 77/E.O/98 shall be enforceable. The above mentioned order passed by the District Forum concerned shall remain stayed for two months. Let a copy of this judgment be made available to the parties as per rules. Appeal disposed of.