DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 15  of  2022

 

Sri Dipankar Sarkar,

S/O- Sri Niranjan Sarkar,

West Durgapur, near Ishanchandranagar HS School,

Ishanchandranagar, Pin- 799003, 

District- West Tripura. .........Complainant.

 

-VERSUS-

 

1. Department of Posts,

Ministry of Communications,

To the represented by its Director General,

Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg- 110001.

New Delhi.

 

2. Archit Enterprise,

To  be represented by its Authorized Person,

2057, Shree Kuberji Textile World, Saroli,

Surat, Gujrat,

Pin- 395010. ............Opposite Parties.

  

  __________PRESENT__________

 SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

  WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

SRI SAMIR GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant  : Sri Shubhajit Chakraborty,

  Learned Advocate. 

 

For the O.P No. 1 : Sri Biswanath Majumder,

  Learned C.S.G. 

 

For the O.P. No. 2 : None appeared.

   

 

 

ORDER   DELIVERED  ON:  03.03.2023.

 

F I N A L    O R D E R

1. Dipankar Sarkar has filed this complaint against the Department of post, the O.P. No.1 and Archit Enterprise of Gujrat as O.P. No.2.

2. The pleading is that on 02.04.2021 through HDFC Bank the complainant paid Rs.11,740.44/- including shipment charge to the O.P. No.2 as the complainant purchased cloth materials from O.P. No.2. The O.P. No.2 duly shipped the materials through O.P. No.1 on 06.04.2021.

3. The items did not reach the complainant on time as such on 21.04.2021 the complainant lodged complaint with O.P. No.1 but the O.P. No.1 after some enquiry closed the complaint with remark that '' Treated as lost''. The allegation of the complainant is that the O.P. No.1 and 2 are equally responsible.

4. The O.P. No.2 did not appear before this Commission hence, vide order dated 23.08.2022 the case has been proceeding exparte against O.P. No.2.

5. The O.P. No.1 in written objection pleaded that the Secretary of the Postal Department has not been impleaded party as such the complaint is not maintainable. However, in para 10 of the written objection the O.P. No.1 admitted that on enquiry it reveals that 19 bags for Agartala were  not traceable. The case was under enquiry. But pleaded no deficiency in service.

The complainant submitted relevant documents.

6. On the basis of evidence and arguments the following point is taken up for discussion and decision:

  (I) Whether non delivery of the article by the O.P. No.1 inspite of receiving postal charges amount to deficiency in service?

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:

7. The complainant by submitting evidence on affidavit has proved the purchased invoice and payment slip as well. However, the O.P. No.1 has not be denied receipt of postal charges.

8. The plea of O.P. No.1 that Secretary, Postal Department has not bee impleaded party is not tenable   in view of the fact that Section 80 of C.P.C. Is not applicable in the Consumer Commission. Further the niceties of Civil Procedure code are not applicable in Consumer Court. As such the further plea of O.P. No.1 that there is no deficiency in service on the part of O.P. No.1 is also not acceptable in view of the fact that the O.P. No.1 inspite of receiving postal charges has failed to deliver the item to the complainant which has caused financial loss as well to the complainant.

9. However, the O.P. No.2 is not responsible for any deficiency in service as the O.P. No.2 took the article with O.P. No.1. 

  This point is decided accordingly.

10. In the result, it is ordered that the O.P. No.1 shall pay Rs.11,740.44/- to the complainant with a further sum of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty Thousand) as compensation for deficiency in service which includes litigation cost as well. This amount has to be paid within 60 days from today otherwise it shall carry interest @ 7.5% P.A. from today till the date of actual payment.

  The case stands disposed off. 

Supply a copy of this Final Order free of cost to the complainant and the Opposite parties.

 

Announced.

 

 

 

SRI  GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

WEST TRIPURA,AGARTALA

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,AGARTALA.