BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no.180 of 2016 Date of Institution : 22.07.2016
Date of Decision : 15.12.2016.
1. Yogesh Bhargav, aged about 27 years son of Shri Mahabir Parshad Bhargav.
2. Shweta Sharma, aged 27 years wife of Shri Yogesh Bhargav son of Shri Mahabir Parshad Bhargav. Both residents of Sharma Hospital Gurudwara Road, Ellenabad, Distt. Sirsa now residing at Christ Church, New-Zealand through Shri Mahabir Parshad Bhargav Power of Attorney Holder of Yogesh & Shweta, resident of Sharma Hospital Gurudwara Road, Ellenabad, Distt. Sirsa.
……Complainants.
Versus.
1. Chief Post Master General, Delhi Circle, Meghdut Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, Rohtak Circle/ Division, Rohtak.
3. Head Post Master, Main Post Office, Near Lal Batti Chowk, Sirsa.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA………………………..PRESIDENT
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL……MEMBER.
Present: Sh. T.S. Gill, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Rajesh Kumar, ASPO on behalf of opposite parties.
ORDER
The present complaint has been filed by Yogesh Bhargav and Shweta Sharma
through their power of attorney holder Sh. Mahabir Parshad. The case of the complainant is that complainant no.1 who is Non Resident Indian (NRI) was doing the job work as Manager in Alpine Motor-Inn & Café, Springs Junction Westcoast Newzealand and got sanctioned leave up to 22.7.2016 (it should be 22.7.2015 as evident from record) subject to joining the duty work in the said job on 23.7.2016 (23.7.2015). He came to India in the month of April, 2015 in connection with his marriage which was solemnized with complainant no.2 on 19.5.2015. The complainants applied for Visa of complainant no.2 being spouse of complainant no.1. The Embassy of New-Zealand having its branch at Delhi after going through all the documents of complainants and being the complainant no.2 eligible for the said Visa, issued the visa of complainant no.2 which was sent by Embassy via its concern office T.T Services, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi through speed post No.ED-906786443 IN dated 8.7.2015 addressing complainant no.2 at Ellenabad. The complainants had already got booked the Air tickets from India to Newzealand amounting to Rs.1,75,000/- for 20.7.2015. As per the mandatory provisions/ rules of the Postal Department, the authorities of ops were/are duty bound to provide delivery of the same within one week from the date of dispatch, however, the visa of complainant no.2 has not been received till 20th July, 2015. The complainants in order to avoid the loss for not reaching in Newzealand on or before 23.7.2016 (23.7.2015), tried their best to get the Visa, passport and other relevant documents of complainant no.2. They hired the taxi and gone at Main Post Office, Ramesh Nagar Delhi where Senior Post Master sent them to the office of Railway Mail Service, Delhi where they were asked to come on next day and therefore, they had to stay at Delhi alongwith family of both complainants and had to spend an amount of Rs.20,000/- for stay and meal etc. Then they have been forced to take rounds from one office to another and even they visited at the office of ops at Ambala and Rohtak and also approached the Post Master, Main Post Office, Sirsa. The complainants and their respective families thereafter many times paid visits to the ops time and again up to 20.7.2015 but to no effect. Due to above said deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of ops, the complainant no.1 has been thrown out of the job as he could not join the job up to 23.7.2015. The returning air tickets from India to Newzealand also lapsed and as such they have to get renewed the same for which they have undergone economic loss of Rs.55,000/- besides other huge financial loss. The deficiency in service and negligence of ops have been proved from the letter dated 4.12.2015. The complainants approached the op no.3 for redressal of their grievance but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing reply wherein they took preliminary objection that complainants have no cause of action to file the present complaint as they are not the consumer of ops. It has been submitted that speed post article Number ED-906786443IN was delivered at the given address on 23.7.2015 by Ellanabad Sub Post Office. The sender of a speed article i.e. consumer may claim compensation equal to composite speed post booking charges paid by him to the department of post as per provisions laid down in Indian Post Office Rules. Regarding para No.15 of the complaint, it has been submitted that on the complaint received from Sh. Mahabir Parshad dated 30.7.2015 submitted to Chief General Manager, Business Development and Marketing, Directorate New Delhi, a letter dated 4.12.2015 was sent to Suptd of Post Offices, Hisar Postal Division, Hisar by the office of CPMG. Delhi Circle, New Delhi to ascertain the delivery disposal details of the above mentioned speed post article. Accordingly, the details of the case were intimated to office of CPMG, Delhi vide this office letter dated 27.1.2016. However, no claim of compensation as applicable as per existing rules on the subject matter was raised by the sender of this speed post article.
3. By way of evidence, complainants produced affidavit Ex.CW1/A, special power of attorney Ex.C1 and copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C23. On the other hand, ops tendered documents Ex.R1/A, Ex.R1/B and Ex.R2 to Ex.R12.
4. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and official of ops and have gone through the case file carefully.
5. It is an admitted case of both the sides that an article No.ED906786433IN was booked by TT Services at Safdarjung Enclave Sub Post Office, New Delhi on 8.7.2015 and booked article was addressed to Shweta Sharma i.e. complainant no.2. Moreover, from the letter dated 27.1.2016 a copy of which is placed on file as Ex.R2 it is clear that as per inquiry of the ops department reasons for sending the article back to NSH Rohtak by Sirsa HO, instead of invoicing it in SP bag prepared for ICH Hisar for further dispatch to Ellnabad SO was that the article received missent was bagged for NHS Rohtak by postal assistant who was working as SP booking and dispatch postal assistant at Sirsa HO on 14.7.2015 and the concerned employee i.e. Sh. Ashish Kumar Postal Assistant has also been terminated from service with effect from 23.12.2015. Besides it, from letter dated 23.10.2015, copy of which is placed on file as Ex.R4, it is clear that article in question as detailed above was booked by ops at Delhi on 8.7.2015 and was dispatched to Rohtak and Rohtak office of ops dispatched the same to Sirsa Head Office on 12.7.2015 and Sirsa Head Post Office received it on 13.7.2015 but Sirsa Head Office wrongly bagged it back to Rohtak instead of Ellenabad sub office. Due to wrong dispatch of the ops department to each other, the bag remained with their offices between Delhi to Sirsa and in the last it reached to Ellenabad sub office on 22.7.2015 and it was delivered on 23.7.2015 after the period of 15 days of booking. The purpose of booking through speed post by paying extra charges to the postal department has been defeated when the article could not be delivered at its destination to its beneficiary for such a long period of 15 days. All this amounts to deficiency and negligence in service on the part of opposite parties and ops department is guilty of deficient and negligent services as defined in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
6. Now coming to the quantum of compensation, after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that booked article has not been lost by the ops and ultimately delivered it to the complainant no.2 after delay of 15 days, in these circumstances, in our view it will be justified if the complainants are awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- on account of harassment due to late delivery of the article. We ordered accordingly with the direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation to the complainants jointly and severally within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainants will be entitled to interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 22.7.2016 till actual payment. The present complaint stands disposed of accordingly. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:15.12.2016. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
Member.
