Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/55/2022

Raman Kumar Soni - Complainant(s)

Versus

Superindendent/Incharge, Speedpost - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

21 Oct 2022

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

 

Appeal No.	55 of 2022
Date of Institution	17.05.2022
Date of Decision	21.10.2022

 

Raman Kumar Soni, S/o R.P. Soni, #3879, Sec-32-D, Chandigarh-160047.

                                                                 …..Appellant/Complainant

Versus

Superintendent/Incharge, SPEEDPOST, General Post Office,
Sector-61, Mohali-160062

                                                               …..Respondent/ Opposite Party

BEFORE:  JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER

               

Argued by:  Sh. Raman Kumar Soni, Appellant in person.

 Sh. Vikas Kashyap, Advocate for the respondent.

                       

PER PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

              This appeal is directed against an order dated 19.04.2022, rendered by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T., Chandigarh, (hereinafter to be called as the District Commission only), vide which, it dismissed the Consumer Complaint, filed by the complainant.

2. The facts, in brief, are that the complainant booked a speed post parcel of medicines on 23.07.2020, for M/s Patidar Medicals, MM Hospital, Sagwara, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan from General Post Office
   at Phase-7, Mohali and paid the amount of Rs.247.80 vide Exhibit-1. It was stated that Speed Post guarantees delivery within 72 hours for parcels booked in the range of 1000 kms. from booking location. It was further stated that there was no update till 31.07.2020. It was further stated that when there was no response, the complainant approached Supervisor of GPO, Phase-7, Mohali on 04.08.2020 with written complaint and requested to trace the parcel and thereafter, it was revealed that after 15 days parcel had reached the destination on 07.08.2020, whereas another parcel booked on 22.07.2020 for Udaipur was delivered on 31.07.2020 i.e. after 8 days.  It was further stated that the parcel after reaching Sagwara on 07.08.2020 was still not delivered to the party and it had to collect the same on 10.08.2020 after waiting for delivery for 3 days. It was further stated that the aforesaid act of the Opposite Party, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint, was filed.
3. The Opposite Party filed its reply and admitted the factual matrix of the case, stated that they had no knowledge what was in the parcel sent by the complainant which was never disclosed by the complainant. It was further stated that complainant was using the postal services for commercial purpose and Opposite Party had not taken any premium/extra charges from him. It was further stated that due to non-availability of train and air services at that time due to complete lockdown, department of posts devised its own RTN (Road Transport Network) which was planned to route articles from one state to another so as to ensure supply of essential items i.e. medicines and other items related to COVID-19 etc. It was further stated that as per extant provisions of Speed Post articles, in case of delay in delivery due to bandh/curfew, no compensation is admissible. It was further stated that there is no deficiency in service on their part, and the Opposite Parties had prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. In the rejoinder, filed by the complainant, he reiterated all the averments, contained in the complaint.
5. The parties led evidence, in support of their case.
6. After hearing the complainant in person and counsel for the Opposite Party, and, on going through the evidence, and record of the case, the District Commission, dismissed the complaint.
7. Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, has been filed by the Complainant.
8. We have heard the Appellant in Person and Counsel for the Respondent and have gone through the evidence, and record of the case, carefully.
9. After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the contentions, advanced by the Parties, and the evidence, on record, we are of the considered opinion, that the appeal is liable to be dismissed, for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.
10. The record of the learned District Commission shows that the sole grouse of the appellant/complainant is that the parcel which has been booked by the respondent/Opposite Party was delivered late and not within the stipulated time period. However, the stand taken by the respondent is that due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, circumstances of the curfew/lockdown were there and hence there was no deficiency in rendering proper service on its part. It is worth mentioning here that as per the Govt. of India, Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts, New Delhi, while issuing revised instructions for booking/processing/transmission/delivery of postal mail under clause (iv) stated “Notice may be displayed prominently in post offices, BNPL/Bulk booking centres that the delivery of articles may be delayed due to restricted operations of flights/trains.” Therefore, this Commission finds that there is absolutely no deficiency on the part of the respondent/Opposite Party in performance of its duties and accordingly, the said appeal deserves to be dismissed.
11. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Commission is upheld.
12. Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.
13. The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

 

Pronounced.

21.10.2022

             

 

 

                                                                                    Sd/-

                           [JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

                                                                  

 

 

                                                                               Sd/-                                          

[PADMA PANDEY]

MEMBER

 

 

 

 

                                                                                    Sd/-                                                       

[RAJESH K. ARYA]

 MEMBER

GP