DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI
C.C NO.39 OF 2016
Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra - President.
Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattanaik - Member.
Sri Purna Chandra Tripathy - Member.
Debendra Nayak,
S/O: Late Digambar Nayak. At/PO:Lingagada
PS: G. Udayagiri Dist: Kandhamal Odisha-7621100 ………………………….. Complainant.
Versus .
- The Superintendent of post offices
Phulbani Division, Phulbani Dist: Kandhamal, Odisha- 762001.
- The Sub-post Master
Sub-Post Office, G. Udayagiri Dist: Kandhamal, Odisha-762100.
…………………………….. OPP. Parties.
For the Complainant: Self.
For the OPP. Parties: Self.
Date of Order: 31-01-2017
O R D E R
The case of the Complainant in brief is that an article was booked by him by registered post on 16-07-2016 at the Sub Post Office G, Udayagiri, addressed to the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Janapank of the District of Boudh. He came to know from S.B.I Janapank on 15-09-2016 that he lossed Rs. 43,957/- towards death benefit of his late mother as the article had not reached in the Branch Office of the S.B.I on or before the stipulated date it is on 25-07-2016. On 19-09-2016 the Complainant filed a complaint before the O.P No.1 but the O.P No.1 replied on 21-09-2016 that the said letter was delivered on 16-09-2016. As the said article was reached after 2 months from the date of booking, he lossed Rs. 43,957/- and suffered both mentally and financially for which this complaint is filed by him to recover the loss amount of Rs. 43,957/- from the Opp.Parties and claimed compensation of Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 10,000 towards cost of litigation.
-2-
The case of the Opp.Parties as per their joint version is that the said registered letter dated 16-07-2016 was sent to Laxmi Prasad Branch Office for disposal but Laxmiprasad BO returned the same to Boudh MDG because the article was to be delivered under the jurisdiction of Janapank BO. Thereafter the article in question was delivered to addressee on 22-07-2016 and the copy of the delivery slip is attached for reference. As the tracking report shows “Laxmi Prasad B.O item delivered” on 16-09-2016, it was replied by O. P No.1 that the letter was delivered on 16-09-2016 but the post Master Boudh MDG has reported that the aforesaid article was delivered to the addressee on 22-07-2016 without any delay. Hence, the O.P have not committed any deficiency in service in their part and prayed to dismiss the complaint.
We have gone through the complaint petition, the joint version filed by the O.Ps and documents filed by both the parties in support of their case. We have also heard the complaint and the representative of the O.Ps. It is admitted by the O.P No.1 that he gave reply to the Complainant that registered article dated 16-07-2016 was delivered on 16-09-2016 but in the version it was clarified by the O.Ps that the same mistake was committed from the tracking report but subsequently the article was delivered on 22-07-2016 as reported by Boudh MDG. So, there is no negligence on the part of the O.Ps as the article was delivered within a week. Apart from this, the Complainant had not proved how he lossed Rs. 43,957/- .As per Complainant the registered article should be reached before the Branch office of the S.B.I, Janapank on or before 25-09-2016 but as per version of the O.Ps the article was delivered on 22-07-2016 before the stipulated date. So, the question of loss on the part of the Complainant does not arise. More over the B.M of S.B.I Janapank Branch is not a party in this case. As there is no definite evidence against the O.Ps to prove the deficiency in service, this complaint is dismissed being devoid of merit. But the Complainant is at liberty to claim the death benefit of his late mother if any against the branch office of SBI, Janapank as per provision of law.
The C.C is disposed of. Supply free copies of this order to both the parties at an early date.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
