Date of Filing – 01.10.2015
Date of Hearing – 02.07.2017
Challenge in this Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) is to the Judgement/Final Order dated 31.08.2015 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South 24 Parganas at Alipore (for short, Ld. District Forum) in Consumer Complaint no. 531/2014. By its order, the Ld. District Forum allowed the consumer complaint lodged by the Respondent Sri Priyasankar Bose under Section 12 of the Act with certain directions upon the Opposite Parties to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/-, litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- and also Rs.50,000/- as punitive damages.
The Respondent herein being Complainant lodged the complaint stating that on 09.08.2014 he booked one speed post being article no.EW280181171IN from Haltu Post Office without acknowledgement card. On 01.09.2014 the complainant visited the post office to ascertain the correct position of delivery of letter but OP has miserably failed to give any information to that effect. Hence, the respondent approached the Ld. District Forum with prayer for several reliefs.
The OP by filing a written statement has stated that the speed post of the complainant which was booked on 09.08.2014 from Haltu Post office was duly received by the addressee on 11.08.2014 and as there was no deficiency, the OP prayed for dismissal of the case.
After considering the materials on record, the Ld. District Forum by the impugned Judgement/Final Order allowed the complaint with certain directions upon the OP i.e. the Post Master of Haltu Post Office. To assail the said order, the OP has come up in this Commission with the present appeal.
I have heard Mrs. Ratna Brahmachari, Ld. Advocate for the Appellant. None appears for the Respondent when the record was taken up for hearing.
I have scrutinised the materials on record and considered the submission advanced by the Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant.
Undisputedly, on 09.08.2014 the Respondent sent one speed post from Haltu Post Office being No.EW28018117IN. The truck consignment report makes it quite clear that the item was duly delivered to the addressee on 11.08.2014.
On behalf of complainant, it was agitated before the Ld. District Forum that on 01.09.2014 when the respondent visited the post office, despite repeated requests, no information was given to him by the post office. The Ld. District Forum held the post master was deficient as the post office did not give any information to the respondent. The reason assigned by the Ld. District Forum is not at all tenable either in facts or in law.
It is evident that the speed post which was booked on 09.08.2014 from Haltu Post Office was duly received by the addressee just within two days later specifically on 11.08.2014. I am surprised to note that the respondent without ascertaining the actual state of affairs from the addressee to whom the speed post was sent, approached the post office on 01.09.2014 to ascertain the actual position of the said speed post. The respondent could search the net and could collect truck consignment report on going to the website of ‘India Post’ but without availing the proper procedure, when the respondent approached the Ld. District Forum, it can be presumed that with some ill intention he lodged the complaint before the Ld. District Forum.
In any way, when it is quite apparent that there was no deficiency in services on the postal authority, the Ld. District Forum should have dismissed the complaint with imposition of heavy cost. Without doing so, when the Ld. District Forum passed an order not in conformity with the facts or law, certainly, the order is liable to be set aside.
In view of the above, the appeal is allowed exparte.
The impugned Judgement/Final Order is hereby set aside.
Consequently, CC/531/2014 stands dismissed.
The Registrar of this Commission is directed to send a copy of this order to the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South 24 Parganas at Alipore (now at Baruipur) for information.
