SMT. RAVI SUSHA: PRESIDENT
Complainant filed this complaint U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 against OP seeking to get an order directing OP to pay Rs.2300 as value of article Rs.25000 towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP.
Case of complainant is that the complainant had sent an article containing stamp of Mahathma Gandhi and one medal for Rs.2300 through speed post on 03/07/2019 but the speed post article never reached the destination. The article was sent to his friend. Many complaints were given to OP but there was no solution. At last OP informed that they could not trace out the article from Rohtak Division and offered a compensation as Rs.142. Instead of accepting the offer of OP complainant filed this complaint stating there is gross deficiency in service on the part of OP and demanded enhances compensation. Hence filed this complaint.
The OP has admitted that the speed post are sent from Mundalur PO on the same date to its destination and as per the track record of the article, the article has reached Rohtak RMS on 05/07/2019. The manager speed post Rohtak has reported that the disposal of the article after its reach at Rohtak not traceable. Hence OP has intimated facts to the complainant and obtained claim papers and issued compensation as per clause 183 of post office guide part 1 on 21/11/2019 as a final settlement. OP also invoked the provisions of section 6 of Indian post office Act and stated that there was neither fraudulent or willful negligence has happen nor alleged by the complainant. OP prayed for the dismissal of complainant.
Evidence in this case consists of chief affidavit of complainant and two documents. Complainant was examined as Pw1 and marked Ext.A1. Postal receipt dated 03/07/2019 as Ext.A1 and letter of OP dated 06/09/2019 as Ext.A2. Complainant was cross examined by OP and marked compensation form filled by complainant demanding Rs.2300 instead of Rs.142 as Ext.B1.
Here there is no dispute that the complainant had booked a speed post article No.EL638885033IN dated 03/07/2019 from Mundalur PO to Rajesh Mathava at Hariyana and the article could not reached the destination.
So far as the provision of section 6 are concerned no officer of the Post Office is to incur any liability by reason of any such loss misdelivery, delay or damaged article unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his willful act or default. It is difficult for the consumer to prove that there has been a fraudulent act or a willful act or default on the part of an officer. OP has not explained about what happened to the article after it reach at Rohtak RMS manager post office. Then OP should have fixed up responsibility of that officer who was responsible for the loss of the postal article. Besides this, there is no plausible explanation as to whether they paid the amount as they suggested or consider the enhanced amount mentioned by the complainant in Ext.B1. All these fact go to show that there has been deficiency in service of the OP.
For the forgoing reasons, we find that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP and hence the complainant is entitled to get relief.
In the result complaint is allowed in part OP is directed to pay Rs.2300 as cost of the article and to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount Rs.2300 carries interest at 9% per annum from the date of order till realization.
Complainant can realize the amount from OP by filing execution application against OP as the provisions of Consumer protection Act 2019.
Exhibits
Ext.A1 - Postal receipt dated 03/07/2019
Ext.A2 - Letter of OP dated 06/09/2019
Ext.B1 – Compensation form
Sd/ Sd/ Sd/
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew Sajeesh K.P
(mnp)
/Forward by order/
Senior Superintendent
