DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 30^th day of April 2019

Present: Smt.Shiny.P.R. President

            : Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member                       Date of filing: 06/08/2018

                                                      (CC.No.97/2018)          

Pradeep.C.N,

WTP Department, AIMS

Amritha Institute of Medical Sciences,

Ponekkara, Idappally,

Ernakulam District. Kerala - 682 041.                               -  Complainant

(By Party in Person only) 

Vs 

1. Kerala Post Master General,                                            

    Thiruvananthapuram – 695 001.

2. Kerala Northern Regional Post Master General,

    Kozhikkode – 673 011.

3. The Postal Superintendent,

    Ottappalam Division, Ottappalam – 679 101.

4. The Post Master,                                                                  - Opposite Parties

    Kumaranellur – 679 552.

5. The Branch Post Master,                                                  

    Kappoor Via, Kumaranellur – 679 552.

6. The Postman,  Kappoor Branch Post Office,

     Kappoor Via, Kumaranellur – 679 552.

O R D E R

By Smt.Shiny.P.R,  President.

Brief facts of complaint.

          Complainant submitted that he had sent a registered letter dated 05.05.2018, to an addressee named Shri.Haridas.P, Padathu Veedu, Sreehari, Kappur.P.O – 679552. But 6^th opposite party delivered the letter to the minor son of the addressee. Complainant submitted that opposite parties have no authority to deliver the letter to the minor son of the addressee. At the time of posting of the letter, Mr Haridas was in the very same address, but the opposite parties did not deliver the letter to him, instead they handed over the letter to his minor son. Due to the above act of the opposite parties complainant has suffered a lot of mental agony. Hence the complaint. The complainant prays for an order directing opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony.

Complaint was admitted and issued notices to opposite parties. All the opposite parties entered appearance and filed version contending the following:-

Opposite parties admitted that they have delivered the above said registered letter addressed to Shri.Haridas.P, Padathu Veedu, Sreehari, Kappur.P.O – 679 552 to his son Akhil Manu on the basis of authorization letter submitted by Shri.Haridas the addressee. Opposite parties conducted an enquiry about the complaint Smt.Shiny Haridas, wife of Haridas filed a statement before ASP Pattambi Sub Division in which it has been stated that their son has handed over the letter to her husband and therefore the purpose of sending the registered letter has served. It is also stated that they do not have any complaint against the department in delivering the registered letter to their son. Opposite parties further contended that as the authorization was submitted by the addressee, there is no need for waiting for the addressee and therefore the delivery staff has delivered letter to his son. The duty of the Department of Posts is to deliver the letter and after delivery, the Department has no role in it and it has been done by the delivery staff correctly. There is no deficiency in service from their part. Hence complaint is to be dismissed with the cost of these opposite parties. 

Both parties filed their respective chief affidavits. Exts.A1 to A3 were marked from the part of complainant. Exts.B1 to B8 also marked on the side of opposite parties.   

The following issues are to be considered.             

            1.  Whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties? 

2. If so, what are the reliefs and cost? 

Issues 1 & 2

Heard. We have perused the affidavits and documents filed before the Forum.  Ext.A1 shows that the registered letter sent to Haridas.P, Padathu Home, Sreehari, Kappur.P.O – 679552 was delivered to Akhil Manu.P.H. On perusing Ext.B1 authorization letter it is clear that Mr.Haridas authorized Post Master of Kappur Post Office to deliver Registered letters, money orders, parcels and insured articles addressed to him, to his messenger Smt.Shiny Haridas and Akhil Manu. According to opposite parties on the basis of the Ext.B1 letter 6^th opposite party delivered the letter to one of the authorized person, hence there is no deficiency in service on their part. As per clause 60 of the Post office Guide Part I (Ext.B2) addressee can authorize the post master to deliver articles to his messenger. In this case 6^th opposite party, the authorized person has delivered the articles to one of the messenger Akhil Manu and Akhil Manu handed over the above said letter to his father.  Ext.B4 statement given by Smt.Shiny Haridas proves this aspect. More over complainant has no case that the above said Akhil Manu did not deliver the letter to his father. Under the above circumstances we cannot attribute deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As per Section 6 of the Indian Post office Act 1898 the Government shall not incur any liability by reason of loss, mis-delivery 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 Government as herein after provided and no officer of the post office shall incur any liability by reason of any such loss , mis-delivery, delay or damage, unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his willful act or default. In the present case complainant has not proved any willful act or default on the part of opposite parties. Under the above circumstances complaint is dismissed.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 30^th day of April 2019.

                                                                                                Sd/-

                  Shiny.P.R.

                   President      

Sd/-     

    V.P.Anantha Narayanan

                   Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 - Acknowledgement card of letter sent by Sri.Pradeep.C.N to Sri.Haridas P.

Ext.A2 - Reply letter of the petition sent to the postal authorities by the complainant

            dated 25.06.2018.  

Ext.A3 - Reply letter of the petition sent to the postal authorities by the complainant

            dated 03.07.2018. 

Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties

Ext.B1 - The letter delivered to the one of the authorized person by 6^th opposite party

  and signed by Sri.Haridasan dated 15.4.18.

Ext.B2 - As per clause 60 of the Post office Guide Part I.

Ext.B3 – Statement given by Sri.Jishnu.K.J acting GOSMD Kappur before ASP Pattambi

  Sub Division on 21/08/2018 at Kappur.

Ext.B4 - Statement given by Smt.Shiny Haridasan, Padath House, Kappur before ASP
             Pattambi Sub Division on 21/08/2018 at Kappur.

Ext.B5(Series) – Letter sent to Sri.Haridasan by the complainant.

Ext.B6 – Certified copy of Section IV – Prohibited articles issued by Superintendent of

  Post Office, Ottappalam Divison.

Ext.B7- Certified copy of Chapter III – Postage issued by Superintendent of

  Post Office, Ottappalam Divison.

Ext.B8 – Letter sent to Superintendent of Post Offices, Ottapalam by Sri.Jishnu.K.J,

            GOSMD(AG) Kappur dated 5/10/18.

Witness examined on the side of complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of opposite parties

Nil

Cost :  NIL