Order No. 14 dt. 21/11/2016
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is company working with functioning capability of a Govt. of India enterprise. During the course of its functioning came across a demand from its party viz. M.G. Gopalakrishnan of Ernakulum District, Kerala against the letter dt.14l.11.13 received by the complainant on 21.11.13 immediately made a payment of Rs.5,8,351/- and the said payment was made in accordance with an order passed in an appeal before Hon’ble Karnataka High Court. The said letter was sent through o.p. no.1 and the said postal envelop was received by o.p.no.1 on 28.11.13. The complainant could not know the fate of the said envelop. The complainant’s office staff became anxious regarding the fate of the said letter. Realizing the dilatory tactics adopted by o.ps. the complainant sent a lawyer’s notice claiming compensation of Rs.1 lakh for gross negligence and deficiency in service. The said letter was received by o.ps. and reply was given. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for compensation of Rs.80,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.
The o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the complainant stated that they sent Rs.5,88,351/- to the addressee was a illegal act and no money can be sent through speed post, if any one sent through speed post the same was done for a malafide intention to avoid insurance charge for which the post office cannot be held liable for any uninsured goods and article. It was also stated that there is no scope for verifying the contents in the speed post article and it was further reiterated that on receipt of letter dt.4.12.13 regarding non delivery of postal article o.ps. made web based enquiry of the matter and ascertain that the article in question has not received by office of delivery till 5.12.13 and subsequently a searching was made to ascertain the actual state of affairs and it was stated that insurance is compulsory for sending cheques and/or any valuable articles. The complainant intentionally / motivated to avoid insurance charge sent the same which amounts to negligence on the part of the complainant. It was ascertained subsequently that the article was delivered on 27.1.14 but the complainant suppressed the said fact with ill motive to have compensation from the department of post. The o.ps. claimed compensation from the complainant for filing such false case for violation of Indian Post Office Rule 66B of Postal Act i.e. amount of composite speed charged paid by the complainant or Rs.1000/- whichever is less.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps.
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the compensation as prayed for.
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
On going through the evidence of the respective parties as well as submissions made by both the parties that the complainant sent one article booked on 22.1.13 and the same was dispatched through Park Street Post Office to comply the order of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and since the article did not provide to the addressee the complainant became anxious and wanted know actual fate of the speed post which was not properly replied resulting in filing of this case by the complainant.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant emphasized that such negligent act on the part of the o.ps. established the fact that there was negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps. the complainant thereby will be entitled to get the compensation as prayed for.
Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that the amount if sent through the speed post that was made illegally and as per postal rules the complainant will have to pay the compensation to the postal department for doing illegal thing by sending the article containing the money or cheque without insured the same. Therefore, o.ps. cannot be held liable for the delay if at all committed and the illegal act of the complainant could not be entertained. Accordingly, ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that the case is liable to be dismissed.
On perusal of the materials on record including the evidence adduced by both the parties it appears that the article was booked on 18.11.13 under no.EW27597135In and dispatched by the same day from Park Street Post Office to NSH Calcutta Airport duly entered in the speed post manifest. As per clause no.184 of postal guide insurance is compulsory for sending cheque and/or any valuable article. The complainant in order to avoid the said cost sent the amount of rs.5,88,351/- through speed post which was an act of negligence on the part of the complainant. From the materials on record it transpires that the article was delivered on 27.1.14 and the complainant by suppressing material fact illegally in order to claimed compensation from the o.ps. filed this case. Accordingly we hold that the complainant will not be entitled to get the relief as prayed for. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.422/2014 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.ps.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
