Delhi

New Delhi

CC/301/2015

Mahboob Khan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Chief Post Master General Delhi Circle - Opp.Party(s)

18 Dec 2019

ORDER

 

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.301/2015                                         Dated:

In the matter of:

       Sh. Mahboob Khan,

        S/o Sh. Waris Khan,

        R/o R-138/B,

        2^nd Floor, Street No.7,

       Ramesh Park, Laxmi Nagar,

        Delhi-110092.

                                     ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

1. The Chief Post Master General,

Delhi Circle,

Meghdoot Bhawant,

Lind Road, New Delhi-110001.

 

2. The Post Master/In-charge,

Of Connaught Place,

Sub Office, New Delhi-01.

            ……….  Opposite Parties

 

NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The gist of the complaint is that the son of the complainant applied for admission to 9^th class in Ali Garh Muslim University, Aligarh for a academic session of 2015-16. It is alleged that the application form for getting the above admission alongwith a DD of Rs. 400/-  was sent through speed post on 09/02/2015 vide speed post receipt no. ED594955042IN, the same was delivered by OP to the University on 21/02/2015. The last date of the submission of the application form was 16/02/2015, despite sufficient time OP failed to deliver the speed post to the university well in time and was served upon the university, on 21/02/2015, i.e. after 12 days delay.  Due to the delay  of 12 days  in delivering the letter, the university could not entertain the same and the son of the complainant lost an opportunity to get the admission in the aforesaid university and was forced to pursue his 9^th class from the present school, thereby, causing the monitory burden of Rs. 19,080/- annually on the complainant, whereas if, his son would get the admission in the aforesaid university his son’s annual fees would be Rs. 05,880/-. It is further alleged that due to deficiency in service on the part of OP the son  of the complainant failed to get the admission in the aforesaid university, hence he is entitled for the reliefs claimed.

2.           Complaint has been contested by OP. It denied any deficiency in service on its part and further stated that as per the rules and regulations of the Postal Department, in case of delay in delivery of domestic speed post article or loss of its contents or damages to the contents, compensation shall be double the amount of composite speed post charges paid or Rs. 1,000/- whichever is less. Rest of the allegation of the complainant was simply denied by OP and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint being frivolous and concocted.

3.         Both parties have filed evidence by way of affidavit.

4.         We have heard arguments advanced at bar, have perused the pleadings and evidence adduced on record.

 

5.         It is argued by the complainant that OP is liable for deficiency in services  as  the application form in question was delivered by it after 12 days delay i.e. on 21/02/2015 although it was despatched by complainant on 09/02/2015. It is further argued that due to deficiency in service on the part of OP the son  of the complainant failed to get the admission in the aforesaid university, hence he is entitled for the reliefs claimed.

 

6.         On the other hand OP argued that there is no deficiency in service on its part and further stated that as per the rules and regulations of the Postal Department, in case of delay in delivery of domestic speed post article or loss of its contents or damages to the contents, compensation shall be double the amount of composite speed post charges paid or Rs. 1,000/- whichever is less.  

7.    Perusal of the file shows that the application form was posted by complainant on 09/02/2015 but the same was received by the university on 21/02/2015 i.e. beyond the date of submission of application form.  Hence, the deficiency on the part of the OP on account of delayed delivery of the registered parcel is apparent in the present case and the complaint is entitled to be compensated by the postal authorities.

8.         In view of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct OP  to pay the compensation of Rs. 10,000/-  to the complainant on account of pain and  mental agony suffered by him which will include cost  of litigation.

 

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order. If the said amount is not paid by the OP within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, the same shall be recovered by the complainant along with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till recovery of the said amount. This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post. File be consigned to R.R.

 

Announced in open Forum on 18/12/2019.

 

 

(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

          PRESIDENT

        (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                                          (H M VYAS)

            MEMBER                                                                                       MEMBER