DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 211 of 17.5.2016

                                      Decided on:                 12.7.2017

Preety Dhot D/o Baljeet Singh R/o Village Assarpur Road, Sanour, District Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1.       Head Post Master, India Post, Branch Punjabi University, Patiala.

2.       India Post, Head Office, Leela Bhawan, Patiala through its MD/Chairman/Chief Post Master/Superintendent.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                       Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

                                      Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member                              

ARGUED BY:

                                      Sh.Arun Bansal,Advocate,counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.J.D.Bansal,Advocate,counsel for the OPs.

 ORDER

                                        SMT.NEENA SANDHU, PRESIDENT

                     Ms.Preety Dhot, complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.)

2.                In brief, the case of the complainant is that she appeared in IELTS exams on 7.11.2015. She got her IELTS result card on 26.11.2015. Being not satisfied with the result, she filed the rechecking form. For this purpose she got sent a original draft No.379833 of Rs.7950/-of State Bank of Patiala, Branch Urban Estate, to IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd.Sector 44,Gurgaon on 5.12.2015 at 12.42.16 PM through the Ops .After taking the package, the Ops received Rs.46/- from her and issued e-receipt No.EP362316961IN  with the assurance  that the package would be delivered in a reasonable time. After  passing of  requisite time, she enquired from the Ops about the delivery of the package at specified place. The officials checked the status of the package and told that the package had reached at registered office, from where the same would be delivered at the destined address. Thereafter also, she, so many times visited the  office of the OPs to enquire about the fate of the package. Every time false assurance was given to her. On checking the status of the parcel on internet, it was found  that on 9.12.2015 the  said parcel had been delivered at some other place in Sector 45 S. O. Gurgaon. Due to non delivery of the package in time,  the rechecking of her papers  could not be done and she was forced to take the exams again. A legal notice dated 8.4.2016 was served upon the OPs but  of no effect. The Ops by not delivering the package in time at the given address have committed  deficiency in service which caused mental agony and physical harassment to her. Hence this complaint with a prayer for a direction to the OPs to pay Rs.1,00,000/-as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment alongwith any other relief which this Forum may deem fit.

3.                  On being put to notice, the OPs appeared and filed the written version taking preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant  has not come to the Forum with clean hands and has suppressed true and material facts. On merits, it is admitted that the article was booked by University PO vide speed post No.EP3623169611N dated 5.12.2015 addressed to IDP Education Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon by collecting Rs.46/-. The article had rightly been delivered at IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd.,Sector 44, Gurgaon as per booking.  However, on the tracking record, the delivery of the parcel  has been shown in Sector 45, For the said mistake Ops could not be held liable. It is further stated that on the said given address many other parcels including the parcel in question had been delivered . Since the parcel of the complainant was delivered within time at the right destination, therefore,  they cannot be said to deficient in providing the service and the complaint filed qua them may kindly be dismissed with costs.

4.                On being called to do so, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CA alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C7 and closed the evidence.

                   The ld. counsel for the OPs has tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.S.D.Sheikh,SSP. Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Exs.OP1 to OP2 and closed the evidence.

5.                We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties, gone through the written arguments filed by the ld. counsel for the Ops and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.

6.                The ld. counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant booked a parcel containing rechecking form, on 5.12.2015 with the Ops to deliver it to IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd. Sector,44, Gurgaon. On tracking the  status of the said parcel on internet, it is found that the same had been delivered at Sector 45,  instead of Sector 44, Gorgaon. Due to non delivery of the  parcel in time at the right address, the prescribed period to submit the  rechecking form expired  and as a  result whereof, she  again had to appear for exam. By not sending the parcel in time, at the correct address, the Ops have committed deficiency in service. As such, they may kindly be directed to compensate the complainant as prayed for in the complaint.

 7.         The ld. counsel for the Ops has submitted that the parcel of the complainant was rightly delivered at IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd. Sector,44, Gurgaon as per booking, however on the tracking record the delivery is shown at Sector 45, Gurgaon, which is not a mistake on the part of the Ops. He further submitted that on the said given address many other parcels including the parcel in question have been delivered, which were duly received by IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd. Sector,44, Gurgaon as is evident from the copy of delivery slip Ex.OP2. Once the parcel /article booked by the complainant had already been delivered in time at its destination, then complainant has no occasion to file the present complaint and the same may kindly be dismissed with heavy costs.

8.               Admittedly, complainant booked a parcel/article with the Ops, vide speed post No.EP362316961IN on 5.12.2015 to be delivered to  IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd. Sector,44, Gurgaon, by paying Rs.46/- . On tracing the record of the said parcel on  The  India Post Status,Ex.OP1,  it is evident that the said article was booked on 5.12.2015 and the same  was delivered on 9.12.2015. We have also perused the Special  Delivery slip pertaining to the said parcel, Ex.OP2,  and found that  the  parcel in question had duly been received by the IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd. on 9.12.2015, whose stamp is affixed on it. Thus, from the said documents, it is proved that the article in question had  been delivered by the Ops as per booking. Therefore, they cannot be said to be deficient in providing the services to the complainant. As such, we do not find any merit in the complaint. Consequently, we dismiss the same, without any order as to cost. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost under the Rules. Thereafter, file be indexed and consigned to the record room.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:12.7. 2017      

                                                                   NEENA SANDHU

                                                                       PRESIDENT

                                                                   NEELAM GUPTA

                                                                         MEMBER