DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA(PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> C.C.No.136 of 21.5.2007<br /> Decided on : 22.8.2007<br /> <br /> Ranjit Singh S/o Sh. Mukhtiar Singh, R/o Village Jeeda, Tehsil & District Bathinda.<br /> ...... Complainant<br /> Versus <br /> <br /> 1. Head Post Master, Head Post Office, Bathinda<br /> 2. Head Post Master, Head Post Office, Kanpur. <br /> ...... Opposite parties<br /> <br /> Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986<br /> <br /> QUORUM:-<br /> <br /> Sh. Lakhbir Singh, President<br /> Sh. Hira Lal Kumar, Member<br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> <br /> For the complainant : Sh. Bikramjit Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate<br /> For the opposite parties : Sh. M.R. Gupta, Advocate<br /> <br /> O R D E R.<br /> <br /> LAKHBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT:- <br /> 1. Instant one is a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as the Act) which has been preferred by the complainant seeking direction from this Forum to the opposite parties to refund Rs. 6,000/- to him alongwith interest @ 18% P.A w.e.f. 31.1.2007 till payment & pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for mental tension, agony, botheration, harassment and loss to his reputation, besides costs of the complaint. <br /> 2. Briefly put, the case of the complainant is that he had the intention to purchase 0.32 Bore Revolver from Small Arms Factory, Kanpur. As per requirements, he had to deposit Rs. 6,000/- with General manager of the factory for booking the Revolver. Accordingly, demand draft No. 192082 dated 9.1.2007 drawn on State Bank of India, Kanpur alongwith other important requisite documents required for booking the Revolver was sent by him to General Manager, Small Arms Factory, Kanpur through opposite party No.1 vide Speed Post dated 31.1.2007. Receipt No. SPEE781137399IN dated 31.1.2007 was issued by opposite party No.1. Registered envelope sent by him was expected to reach its destination within 5 days from the date of despatch. It has not reached the office of General Manager till date. Enquiries were made from opposite party No.1 about the fate of the envelope, but to no effect. He was visiting the office of opposite party No.1 time and again, but he could not get any satisfactory reply. He had no other alternative, but to get prepared a fresh demand draft No. 193962 dated 3.4.2007 drawn on State Bank of India, Kanpur. It was again sent to General Manager, Small Arms Factory, Kanpur through Flyking Courier Service on 3.4.2007 for booking the Revolver. This envelope was delivered at its destination on 5.4.2007. Amount of Rs. 56,720/- and some other documents were demanded by the General Manager of the Factory and they were sent by him on 8.5.2007 through Flyking Courier Service. Opposite parties could not deliver the registered envelope at its destination within reasonable time and even till date. Act and conduct of the opposite parties caused him mental tension, agony, botheration,harassment, humiliation and financial loss. He has to get the purchase period extended from 13.6.2007 to purchase the Revolver. Due to the gross deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, unnecessary and unwanted delay was caused in purchasing the Revolver. <br /> 3. On being put to notice, opposite parties filed their version taking legal objections that complaint is not maintainable in the present form; Union of India which is a necessary party, has not been impleaded as party in the complaint; intricate questions are involved and as such, dispute should be relegated to the civil court; complaint is false and frivolous; complainant has not come with clean hands; he is estopped from filing the complaint by his act and conduct and he has concealed true and material facts from this Forum. Speed Post was booked at 12.45 noon on 31.1.2007. It was sent to the Speed Post Centre, Kanpur on 15.23 P.M vide bag No. 8 through RMS Bathinda. It was delivered at the destination on 3.2.2007. This fact has been confirmed by the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, City Division, Kanpur vide letter dated 17.7.2007. Contents of the speed post were not known to them at the time of booking. Department of Posts has no liability for loss, delay and damage to any postal article in the course of transmission as per section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898. They deny the remaining averments in the complaint. <br /> 4. In support of his allegations and averments in the complaint, Ranjit Singh complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit (Ex.C.1), photocopies of demand drafts dated 9.1.2007, 3.4.2007 and 7.5.2007 (Ex.C.2, Ex.C.4 & Ex.C.9), photocopy of postal receipt (Ex.C.3), photocopies of courier receipts (Ex.C.5 & Ex.C.8), photocopy of Form for booking of Revolver (Ex.C.6), photocopies of letters (Ex.C.7, Ex.C.10 & Ex.C.11 respectively), photocopy of e-mail dated 5.4.2007 (Ex.C.12), photocopy of application dated 9.4.2007 (Ex.C.13) and photocopies of Arms Licence (Ex.C.14 & Ex.C.15).<br /> 5. On behalf of the opposite parties, reliance is placed on affidavit (Ex.R.1) of Ms. Balwinder Kaur, Post Master, photocopy of receipt (Ex.R.2), photocopy of details of speed post articles (Ex.R.3), photocopy of list of mail (Ex.R.4) and photocopy of letter dated 17.7.2007 (Ex.R.5).<br /> 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. Apart from this, we have considered written arguments submitted by the parties.<br /> 7. Mr. Ahluwalia learned counsel for the complainant vehementally argued that envelope containing demand draft, copy of which is Ex.C.2, and other documents were booked by the complainant on 31.1.2007 with opposite party No.1 vide postal receipt, copy of which is Ex.C.3. It was addressed to General Manager, Small Arms Factory, Kanpur. It has not reached its destination till date. Complainant has to send another demand draft of Rs. 6,000/- and other documents again to the General Manager. He has to get the purchase period extended.<br /> 8. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the opposite parties argued that speed post got booked by the complainant on 31.1.2007 was delivered to the addressee on 3.2.007 and as such, opposite parties are not at fault at all. Moreover, under section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 Department of Posts has no liability for loss, misdelivery or delay or damage to any postal article in the course of transmission by post. <br /> 9. Onus to prove deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is upon the complainant. He is required to prove it by way of leading cogent and convincing evidence. No-doubt, complainant reiterates his version in his affidavit Ex.C.1, but this itself is not enough to hold that envelope got registered by him and sent to General Manager, Small Arms Factory, Kanpur on 31.1.2007 through opposite party No.1 has not reached its destination till date. Reply of the complaint was filed by the opposite parties taking the specific plea that speed post booked by the complainant on 31.1.2007 was delivered at the destination on 3.2.2007. To establish it, opposite parties have placed and proved on record affidavit Ex.R.1 of Ms. Balwinder Kaur, Post Master. Ex.R.4 is the copy of the list of mails booked on 31.1.2007 at Bathinda. Opposite parties had enquired about the fate of the speed post No SPEE781137399IN in question from Sr. Superintendent of Posts, City Division, Kanpur vide letter, copy of which is Ex.R.5. It has been confirmed by Sr. Superintendent of Posts, City Sub Division, Kanpur that speed post was delivered at the destination on 3.2.2007. Speed post was delivered to the addressee against receipt and copy of the same is Ex.R.2. All the official acts performed by the public servants in the discharge of their public duties are presumed to be correct unless otherwise proved. In this case, complainant did not muster courage to prove record of General Manager, Small Arms Factory, Kanpur that speed post dated 31.1.2007 sent by the complainant containing demand draft of Rs.6,000/- was not received in his office on 3.2.2007. No affidavit of any official of the office of General Manager, Small Arms Factory has been placed and proved on record that registered envelope containing demand draft and other documents was not received on 3.2.2007 at Kanpur. In these circumstances, no other conclusion can be arrived at than the one that speed post/registered envelope sent by the complainant on 31.1.2007 was received by the addressee on 3.2.2007. Accordingly, no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is proved. Complaint being devoid of merits is dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Copy of this order be sent to the parties. File be consigned. <br /> <br /> Pronounced (Lakhbir Singh)<br /> 22.8.2007 President<br /> <br /> <br /> (Hira Lal Kumar)<br /> Member <br /> <br /> <br /> (Dr. Phulinder Preet)<br /> Member <br /> <br /> 'bsg'<br /> <br /> <br />