Presents:-
- Sri P. Samantara, President.
- Smt. S.Rath, Member.
Dated, Bolangir the 8th day of July 2015.
C.C.No.54 of 2014.
National Security & Allied Service at Talpalipara, Bolangir,
Represented through its Managing Director Surendra Pradhan,
Office near Sadar Police Station, Bolangir, P.O/P.S. and Dist-
Bolangir.
.. .. Complainant.
-Versus-
The Superintendent of Post Office, Dist.Head Post Office,
At-Bhagirath Chowk,Bolangir Town, P.O/P.S/Dist-Bolangir.
.. .. Opp.Party.
Adv.for the complainant- Sri J.K.Sai
Adv.for the Opp.Party. – Sri S.K.Mishra, G.P.
Date of filing of the case -30.07.2014
Date of order - 08.07.2015
JUDGMENT.
Sri P.Samantara, President.
In the matter of an application u/s.12 of the C.P.Act,1986, filed by the complainant against the the O.P alleging deficiency in service.
2. The complainant petitioner has booked/mailed one letter under Speed Post, Bolangir Head Post office on dt.23.07.2014 against a payment of Rs 73/- at about 3.42 P.M to be deliverd at the C.S.O.cum Dist.Manager OSCSC Ltd. Sonepur vide issue No.E03707786171N.
3. The complainant complained the consignment contains tender paper but the letter did not reached at C.S.O.Subernapur on the last date of receiving of application i.e dt.23.07.2014 by 3 P.M. Further on enquiry, it is found the letter has been wrongly sent Sambalpur instead of Subernapur. Thereafter the consignment redirected to the C.S.O. Subernapur but same was refused by the receiving authority because late arrival on reach in destination. As the consignment did not reach on time, which made him financial loss, thereby causing harassment and mental agony. Thus the case, praying a direction to pay for the loss sustained eue to deficiency, of service. Relied on speed post receipt, paper advert cut, demand draft photocopy and India post track result dt.22.07.2014.
4. On notice the O.P appeared and filed the version admitting the booking of article No.-E03707786171N under speed post which was addressed to C.S.O.-cum- District Manager, Odisha State Civil Supply Corporation Limited, Subernapur. The article was received in NSH Sambalpur on 22.07.2014. On 24.07.2014 the article was returned to Sonepur MDG and return back to the sender due to refusal by the addressee. At last the article in question delivered to the ;sender on dt.26.07.2014.
5. Also contending, the petitioner has not given a chance to the O.P for enquiry into the fact of the case. The complainant has neither complained nor approached the O.P with the allegations. The allegations in sustenance of irreparable pecuniary loss, physical hardship and deficiency of service is merely a presumptions of the petitioner. It is further said as per ;the Sec.6 of the Indian Post Office Act,1989, the Government shall not incur any liability by reason of loss, misdelivery or delay of or damage to, any postal article in course of transmission by post, except in so far as such liability may in express terms be undertaken by the Central Govt. as hereafter provided and no officer of the post office shall incur any liability by reason of any such loss, misdelivery, delay or damage, unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his willful act or default”. In view of such submission made in the foregoing discussion there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P and the complainant is not entitled to any relief. The case is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed with cost.
6. Heard the learned submission of the petitioner counsel and the O.P in apt attention. Perused the documents at hand and relative records of evidence so also the erudite arguments. Consequently it is surfaced.
7. Prima facie the institution named “ National Security and Allied Service, Talpalipada, Bolangir is a society so a person under section-2(m)(iv) of C.P.Act, thereby a consumer in booking of letter vide speed post article No.-E03707786171N on dated 22.07.2014 against payment Rs 73/- is a consideration and earn the status of a bonafide consumer under the provisions of the Act.
8. The case does not suffer barred of limitation nor jurisdiction. It is an admitted fact an article has been booked, it suffered misdelivery, delay land default in receiving end. On perusal of cited advertisement, it is clear the last date in receiving the letter/consignment was dt.23.07.2014 by 3 P.M. The petitioner averred, the letter that booked under speed post on dated 22.07.2014 to be reach at Sonepur, it landed at Sambalpur post office and on dated 24.07.2014,the content postal bag received at S.O. Sonepur at about 9.14 A.M and the delivery attempt has been refused by the receiving authority not reaching at the competent time as advertised in the news paper. So the petitioner suffered irreparable loss as because he has been deprived of opportunity in not participating in the much lucrative tendered.
9. On perusal of detailed track events for E03707786171N Subscription, which is ample, evidential, the O.P has made attempt to deliver in line with the spirit of the speed post but miserably failed due to early diversion for the fault of the authority, delay causing loss to petitioner and reputation of the public institution. However, the mis delivery, delay and fault has been said to have protected behind the statutory umbrella of section-6 of Indian Postal Act and O.P is silent on detail track record for the article as booked under speed post.
10. The allegation of the petitioner found to be in merit and the rebuttal by the O.P is ;not documentary nor supported with any other record to refute the lapses. The article started with mis-destination subsequently delayed in reaching proper destination, which is vivid and trustworthy. The O.P also not able to produce prescribed distance and the time to be covered guidelines. The petitioner loss is also presumptuous and hightened without any reasonable basis. However delay in delivery is substantive as the document reveals to.
11. In view of such apportioned findings in appreciation of evidence submitted at complainant’s end. We considerably allow the case in merit and our opinion is fortified with the decisions as follow (1) Sita Ram Dhiman, Sri Niwas Collage –Vrs.- Sr.Post Master, Deptt.of Posts, GPO-Held- Indian Post office Act,1891 is an Archaic law and (ii) Non delivery of speed post on correct address is an act of negligence- 2010 (2) CPR 294.
(ii) Head Post Master, Krishnagar Head Post Office-versus- Kingshuk Bosu- Held- Postal Department must pay compensation for delay in delivery of letter.2012(1) CPR 308(W.B).
(iii) Sr. Superintendent of Post office, Alwar Rajasthan-versus- Pushpendu Singh-Held- Postal department should under all probabilities, must see to it that letter reach destination in time:-2012(4) CPR 402.
12. In line with the above made Judgments taking into consideration and the facts and circumstances of the case, it is crystal clear, that the O.P. reached the parcel to the destination after the due date of receipt of tender paper, for which the complainant suffered mentally and financially. Therefore in our considered opinion, the O.P has rendered deficiency in service on his part and liable to pay compensation.
Hence ordered.
ORDER.
We hereby direct the O.P to pay a sum of Rs 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only, for the loss, harassment and mental agony sustained by the petitioner along with a sum of Rs 500/- (Rupees five hundred) only, as cost of litigation expenses, within thirty days of this order, failing which interest @ 9% per annum will accrue on the entire amount from the date of application till realization without any demur.
ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2015.
I agree.
(S.Rath) ( P.Samantara)
MEMBER. PRESIDENT.
