Tripura

West Tripura

CC/67/2019

Smt Moumita Roy. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Postmaster General - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.D.Saha, Mr.K.S.Sarkar.

25 Feb 2020

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

 

CASE NO: CC- 67 of 2019

 

Smt. Moumita Roy,

D/O.-Sri Uddipanta Narayan Roy,

Of North Banamalipur, Agartala,

P.O.-Agartala, P.S.-East Agartala,

Dist.-West Tripura, Pin-799001..…..…..............................Complainant.

 

     VERSUS

 

1. The Chief Postmaster General,

Director Postal Services,

Delhi Circle, New Delhi-110001.

 

2. The Chief Postmaster General,

Assam Circle, Guwahati Head Post Office,

Guwahati G.P.O. Gmc, Kamrup,

Assam-781001.

 

3. The Director,

Agartala Head Post Office,

Agartala, Tripura(West),

Pin-799001.

 

4. The Proprietor,

R.D. Textiles,

Shop No.20, Shankar Bazar,

Katra Shahanshai Chandni Chowk,

​Delhi-110006 …............................................................Opposite parties.

 

 

 

__________PRESENT__________

 

SRI BAMDEB MAJUMDER

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

SRI UMESH DAS

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

SMT. Dr BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

 

 

 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the Complainant : Sri Debal Saha,

Advocate.

 

For the O.P. Nos.1,2&3 : Sri Indrajit Biswas,

Advocate.

 

For the O.P. No.4 : Sri Mridul Kanti Arya,

Advocate.

 

JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON: 25/02/2020

 

J U D G M E N T

The Complainant Smt. Moumita Roy, set the law in motion by presenting the petition U/S-12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 complaining deficiency in service committed by the O.P. Nos.1,2&3.

The Complainant's case, in brief, is that the Complainant is a owner of one garment shop named “Mayur Boutique” situated at New Bodhjung Road, North Banamalipur, Agartala. For the purpose of supplying some garments to her shop, she placed a supply order with the O.P. No.4 on 02/07/2019. She paid cost of the garments amounting to Rs.8,800/-, Rs.500/- for freight charge and Rs.440/- as IGST. Thus she paid in total Rs.9,740/- to the O.P. No.4 for sending the garments to her. According to the Complainant the O.P. No.4 acting upon the supply order of the complainant booked the articles on 03/07/2019 by registered post with the O.P. No.1, the Chief Master General, Director Postal Services, Delhi Circle, New Delhi-110001 to her address vide Postal receipt No.CD448274804IN dated 03/07/2019. The Complainant alleged that the booked item was not received by her. She then visited Agartala Head Post Office and confirmed that the articles did not reach Agartala Post Office. As per advice of the official of Agartala Head Post Office, she registered online complaint vide No.10009414284 on 20/07/2019 with the the Postal Department, Government of India ventilating her grievance regarding non-delivery of the booked items to her. She further stated in her complaint that on 30/07/2019 she was informed by GPO, Delhi that the article which was booked in her name was lost in-transit at Guwahati, GH Division and that her complaint was closed.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the conduct of the O.P. Nos.1,2&3, the Complainant has filed the instant complaint before this Forum claiming Rs.59,740/- which comprises the value of the articles booked for her as Rs.9,740/-, Rs.20,000/- for causing harassment and mental agony, Rs.20,000/- for deficiency of service and Rs.10,000/- litigation costs from the O.P. Nos.1,2&3.

Hence this case.

2. In due course of time notices were duly sent to the O.Ps. from the Forum.

2. The O.P. Nos. 1,2&3 in response to the notices made appearance through their engaged Counsel before the Forum. As the O.Ps. have failed to submit W.O. within 45 days, this Forum by order dated 05/11/2019 in compliance with the section 13(2)(b)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has directed that case be proceeded exparte against the said O.Ps.

   The O.P. No.4 however in response to the notice of the Forum appeared through his engaged Advocate and submitted written objection. The O.P. in his written objection has admitted that as per supply order of the complainant, he had booked the articles from Delhi in the address of the Complainant through registered post vide postal consignment No. CD448274804IN dated 03/07/2019. He has further stated in his written objection that when the Complainant found that the booked articles did not reach her, she requested him to send her copy of the postal receipt. The O.P. has accordingly sent copy of the postal receipt to the Complainant. The O.P. also stated in his W.O. that subsequently he was informed by the complainant that the articles which were booked were lost in-transit at Guwahati. The O.P. No.4 asserted that he was not involved regarding non-delivery of the articles and that he could not be held liable for it. He has thus prayed for exonerating him from liability of this case.

EVIDENCE ADDUCE BY THE PARTIES:-

3. The Complainant examined himself as PW-I and submitted his examination in chief by way of affidavit. She has produced 07 documents namely Tax invoice dated 02/07/2019 issued by the O.P. No.4 against M/S. Mayor Bouthique(shop of the garments of the Complainant) showing sale of Garments worth Rs.9,740/- , copy of Postal receipt of India Post vide No.CD448274804IN dated 03/07/2019 issued by the Delhi GPO, Copy of track consignment of India Post against consignment No.CD448274804IN, copy of the complaint No.10009414284 dated 29/07/2019 lodged by the Complainant with the Postal Authority regarding non-delivery of the articles against consignment No.CD448274804IN dated 03/07/2019, copy of the document dated 29/07/2019 issued by the Ministry of Electronic & Information Technology, Government of India showing receipt of the complaint which was lodged by the Complainant, copy of the track complaint status against complaint No.10009414284 dated 30/07/2019 issued by the India Post indicating lost of the articles in-transit at Guwahati GH Division and closing of the complaint of the Complainant & copy of trade license Certificate issued by the Agartala Municipal Corporation in the name of the Complainant. The documents on identification have been marked as Exhibit – 1 Series. The complainant was cross examined by the O.P. Nos.1,2&3 on law point.

The O.P. Nos.1,2&3 did not adduce any documentary evidence to controvert the case of the Complainant on the point of law.

The O.P. No.4 did not adduce either oral or documentary evidence controverting the case of the Complainant.

4. Now it is to be adjudicated as to whether the Complainant has proved his case against the O.Ps.

We have heard arguments from the side of the Complainant and also from the O.P. side.

We have carefully gone through the complaint, the written objection submitted by the O.P. No.4 and the Exhibited documents of the Complainant.

It is evident from the case record that the O.P. No.4 booked some garments by registered post with the O.P. No.1 vide consignment No.CD448274804IN dated 03/07/2019 on payment of postal charges Rs.393/- against the “Mayur Bouthique” owned by the Complainant as per order placed by the complainant on consideration of Rs.9.740/- paid by the Complainant. But the articles so dispatched by the O.P. No.4 did not reach the destination i.e. in the address of the complainant. The Complainant thereafter took up the matter with the Agartala GPO and that as per advice of the official of Agartala GPO, she registered online complaint vide No.10009414284 on 20/07/2019 with the the Postal Department, Government of India ventilating her grievance regarding non-delivery of the booked items to her. It further reveals from the case record that on 30/07/2019 the Complainant was informed by General Post Office, Delhi that the articles which were booked in her name was lost in-transit at Guwahati, GH Division and that her complaint No.10009414284 dated 29/07/2019 was closed.

 

We find that the case proceeded exparte against the O.P. Nos.1,2&3 as the said O.Ps. had failed to submit W.O. within 45 days as mandated under section 13(2)(b)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The O.P. No.4 on the other hand in his W.O. has admitted about selling of garments worth Rs.9,740/- in favour of the shop of the Complainant and dispatch of the garments by registered post in the address of the Complainant vide consignment No.CD448274804IN dated 03/07/2019 issued by the GPO, Delhi(under Exhibit-I series).

From the track complaint status of the India Post as to the complaint No.10009414284 of the complainant under Exhibit-I series it has been amply proved that the garments which were booked with the O.P. No.1 by registered post by the O.P. No.4 was lost in-transit at Guwahati.

We find that the articles that were sent by registered post did not mandatorily require to be insured as the item “Garment” does not find place under Rule 184 of the Guide of Post Office Act. Admittedly the articles were lost in-transit under the custody of the O.P. Nos.1,2&3. Thus it was an act of deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. Nos.1,2&3. The complainant being the beneficiary is entitled to lodge the complaint on account of the deficiency of service committed by the O.P. Nos.1,2&3.

The judgment dated 05/04/2018 passed by the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Revision Petition No.2208 of 2017 referred to by Learned Advocate for the Complainant has been relied upon by us in deciding the case in hand in favour of the Complainant.

In view of the discussion made above, we find and hold that the Complainant has succeeded in establishing her case U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. We find the O.P. Nos.1,2&3 guilty of committing deficiency of service towards the Complainant. The complainant is thus entitled to get compensation / relief.

Both the issue framed in this case are decided in favour of the Complainant and against the O.P. Nos.1,2&3.

5. In the result, we direct the O.P. Nos.1,2&3 to pay Rs.9,740/- being the price of the garments to the Complainant. We also direct the said O.Ps. to pay Rs.6,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment, apart from litigation cost of Rs.4,000/-. The Complainant is thus entitled to get in total Rs.19,740/-(Rs.9.740/- + Rs.6,000/- + Rs.4,000/- ) from the O.P. Nos.1,2&3. The payment is to be made within 2 months from the date of judgment, if not, it will carry interest @ 9% P.A. till the payment is made in full.

2.  

 

Announced.

 

SRI BAMDEB MAJUMDER

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

SRI UMESH DAS MEMBER, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

SMT. DR BINDU PAL MEMBER, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA