PER:

Nidhi Verma, Member

1        The present complaint has been received from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Amritsar by the order of the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Punjab, Chandigarh for its disposal.

2        The complainant has filed the present complaint by invoking the provisions of Consumer Protection Act under Section 12 and 13 against the opposite parties on the allegations that the complainant had purchased various ladies suit cloth material for herself and for her family members for wearing the same on the soon coming family wedding from opposite party No. 1 under invoice number 31/1/2017 dated 22.3.2017 for Rs. 30,570/- and same was to be sent by opposite party No. 1 to the complainant within 7 working days either by courier / transport or postal services. The ordered cloth materials were sent by opposite party No. 1 through registered parcel service of India Post office booked under Receipt Docket Number C1046845159IN booked at Sudama Nagar Post Office Indore on 22.3.2017 for Rs. 313/- having weight 9000 grams of the parcel packet and acknowledgement of same was issued by opposite party No. 4 to opposite party No. 1 after all the due checking of the parcel and its packing by the duty official at Sudama Nagar Post Office, Indore. The above stated parcel took about 8 days to reach Amritsar Post Office at Opposite Party No. 3 as it was bagged from Opposite party No. 4 to opposite party No. 3 for the delivery of the said parcel to the complainant.  On 31.3.2017 opposite party No. 3 contacted the complainant to visit its office and to take the delivery of the said parcel from the office as they have received open damage package/ parcel and also weight very less in comparison to the details mentioned on the receipt pasted on the said parcel by opposite party No. 4. On 31.3.2017 the complainant visited the office of Opposite party No. 3 in evening and the said parcel was opened by officials of opposite party No. 3. after doing its weight which amounts to 4200 grams only and full description inventory was made alongwith photography of the opened damaged by the said officials of opposite party No. 3 and attested carbon copy of same was given to the complainant. The parcel of the complainant was about 4900 grams less in weight as it was consisting only 4 pieces of the ordered suit cloth material that too got damaged and two other torn pieces of cloth looking like cushion cover and bed cover and same was acknowledged by the officials of the opposite party No. 3. The officials of the opposite party No. 3 led the complainant to receive the parcel at now and contacted the opposite party No. 2 for assistance in the issue and led the complainant to report the issue to opposite party No.2 for relief. It is assured by opposite party No. 2 and opposite party No. 3 that compensation for damaged articles will be provided and lost articles will be found soon and also a departmental enquiry will be conducted within 45 working days and after enquiry the damaged articles will be taken by department for payment of compensation for the damage articles and compensation for lost articles will also be given in case not found by department after said enquiry. The complainant has given his complaint in written as well as submitted orally to the opposite party No. 2 as well as high officials of opposite party No. 3 and also tried to contact to opposite party No. 1 and opposite party No. 4 for any successor but no assistance is provided by any of opposite party to the complainant and the matter is delayed on one pretext or the other. The complainant visited many times to the office of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 as the lost articles were required early due to family wedding but every time a lame excuse is given to the complainant by the officials of the opposite party No. 2 and opposite party No. 3 and they did not pay any heed to genuine request of the complainant. The complainant has to again spend huge amount of money to buy suit pieces again for his family wedding. Finally the complainant approached the opposite party No. 3 on 3.8.2017 apprised of the above said situation and asked opposite party No. 3 to either provide the compensation for the lost / damage articles or to provide the lost articles and pay compensation for damaged received articles of the above said parcel. The situation of utter surprise occur when opposite party No. 3 flatly refused the complainant to provide any kind of lost article or the compensation for the said articles and also told complainant that nothing can be done as few months have passed. The facts and circumstances narrated in the complaint prima facie proves that there was a serious misspelling on part of opposite party No. 1 and clear deficiency and incapability on the part of the opposite parties No. 2 to opposite party No. 4 in rendering proper services to the complainant and the staff of the opposite parties acted negligently and carelessly in dealing with the matter of the complainant. The complainant has suffered extreme harassment both mental and physical on account of opposite parties aforesaid dereliction and failure to provide adequate services to the complainant. There is total deficiency on part of opposite parties in providing adequate service to the complainant. The complainant has also suffered heavy monetary loss due to opposite parties negligence and has also suffered harassment by frequently visiting office of opposite parties No. 2 and 3 for which opposite parties are liable jointly or severally to pay the complainant total sum of Rs. 3,20,000/- i.e. Article lost/ damage of Rs. 30570/- compensation amount of Rs. 2,67,430/- for financial loss and harassment both mental and physical, legal expenses of Rs. 22,000/- alongwith interest thereon @ 18% p.a. thereon from the date of payment till the date of repayment thereof to the complainant.  The complainant has prays for following reliefs:-

(a)     The opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay Rs. 30,570/-  paid by the complainant for said damaged and lost articles alongwith interest thereon @ 18% p.a. thereon from the date of payment till date of repayment thereof.

(b)     A compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,67,430/- for causing great mental pain, agony, emotional distress, harassment suffered by the complainant as well as his family members besides heavy business and financial loss to the complainant and his family due to the deficiency in service, negligence and unprofessional conduct and working of the officials of the opposite parties may also be awarded to the complainant.

(c)      The litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 22,000/- or which this commission deem just and proper, for the filing and pursuing the present complaint against the opposite parties may also be awarded to the complainant.

3        After formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to Opposite Parties and opposite party No. 1 appeared through counsel and has filed written version contesting the complaint by interlia pleadings that the opposite party No. 1 duly sent the ordered material in a closed bundle in order to ensure safe receipt of the said material by the complainant.  The opposite party No. 1 had booked the said articles under registered parcel and was keeping track on the said parcel and she was informing the complainant about its movement from time to time. When the said article was sent by registered parcel, it was quite intact otherwise the opposite party No. 4 would not at all have accepted any damaged/ open parcel. The weight of the said parcel was also duly recorded as 9000 Grams (9 KG). It was due to the negligence of the opposite parties No. 2 to 4 that the said article was damaged in transit. Negligence on the part of opposite parties No. 2, 3 and 4 is admitted. The opposite party No. 1 provided all assistance to the complainant and facilitated her to file the present complaint.  The opposite party No. 1 did the duties which were possible for the benefit of the complainant. The opposite party No. 1 did not act negligently or mercilessly in dealing the subject matter of the complainant.  The opposite party No. 1 has denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the same.

4        The opposite parties No. 2 to 4 appeared through counsel and filed written version by interalia pleadings that the complainant has not come to this commission with clean hands and has suppressed various material facts. The complainant is not entitled for any relief from this commission. The complainant is estopped by her own act and conduct from filing the present complaint. No cause of action has arisen in favour of complainant and against the opposite parties No. 2 and 3. The complainant is legally not maintainable in the present form.  The complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint. The complaint is bad for non joinder and mis joinder of necessary parties. The complainant is not consumer of opposite parties. The parcel duly sealed was tendered by Smt. Bhavna Nimgaonkar at Sudama Nagar SO at 13.04 Hrs. On 22.3.2017 for dispatch to Meenakshi Sharma at Amritsar. The said parcel was booked under registration No. CI046845159In and consigned to ID RMS in sound condition through bag No. CBI0000707086 Duly entered at Sr. No. 02 of the parcel list dated 22.3.2017 at 13.14 hrs for dispatch to its destination at Amritsar (Copy of parcel list is attached as Annexure R/1) The content of said parcel may not be admitted being lack of information to the opposite party No. 4. As per postal manual V, Chapter 3 clause 196 “When an article is received bearing signs of damage or tempering, in a post office for delivery whether in a protecting bag or cover or without protection, the postmaster should carefully scrutinize and weigh the same and preserve the same in his personal custody. An intimation about the damage in form R.P. 63 should be served to the addressee. The article should be opened only after the addressee has signed the receipt. The postmaster may open it if the addressee so desires in the addressee’s presence. If the contents are found by the addressee to be correct, the acknowledgement if any, should be got signed by him or her. If the addressee alleges any shortage or damage to the contents, a detailed inventory of contents should be prepared in duplicate and got signed by the addressee and should also be signed by the postmaster. The weights of all the items of contents should be ascertained and noted in the inventory in case of any abstraction alleged. One copy of the inventory should be attached to the undersigned acknowledgement if any, and forwarded to the postmaster of the office of posting with full particulars of the occurrence for communication to the sender. The other copy of the inventory should be sent by first mail with full report by the postmaster to his immediate superiors and the same is enclosed as Annexure R-2. Open delivery of above said parcel was given to the complainant after making inventory of the articles contained in the parcel.  The complainant has never approached the opposite party No. 3. As per booking receipt enclosed with the application the said parcel was posted at post office in sealed condition by someone Ms. Bhavna Nimgaonkar not by Shri Locha Collection, therefore, being sealed parcel the contents as stated to be clothes material of value Rs. 30570/- may not be admitted. The opposite party No. 3 has denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the same.

5        To prove his case, the Ld. counsel for the complainant has placed on record affidavit of complainant Ex. CW1/A, original postal receipt Ex. C-1, copy of postal track report Ex. C-2, original invoice Ex. C-3, original inventory challan Ex. C-4, photographs Ex. C-5 to Ex. C-8, copy of delivery slip of Indian Post with notice Ex. C-9 and closed the evidence. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No. 1 placed on record affidavit of Bhavana Neemgaonkar Ex. OP1/A alongwith documents copy of emails to OP No. 2 to 4 Ex. OP1/2 to OP1/11, copy of track report Ex. OP1/12 to OP1/14, copy of invoice Ex. OP1/15 and closed the evidence.  Ld. counsel for the opposite parties No. 2 to 4 tendered in evidence affidavit of Vijay Kumar Superintendent Posts (HQ) Amritsar Division Ex. OP2,3,4/1 and closed the evidence.

6        We have heard the Ld. Counsels for the parties and have carefully gone through the record.

7        The combined and harmonious reading of pleadings and documents is going to prove on record that the complainant had purchased various ladies suit cloth material for herself and for her family members for wearing the same on the soon coming family wedding from OP No 1 under invoice number 37/01/2017 dated 22/03/2017 for Rs 30,570/- and same was to be sent to the complainant within 7 working days either by courier/transport or postal services. The ordered cloth materials were sent by OP No 1 through registered parcel service of India Post Office booked under receipt  Docket Number CI046845159IN booked at Sudama Nagar Post Office Indore on 22/03/2017 for Rs. 313/- having weight 9000 grams and same was issued by OP 4 to OP No 1 after all the due checking of the parcel and it’s packaging by the duty official at Sudama Nagar Post Office, Indore. The parcel took 8 days to reach Amritsar Post Office at OP No 3. On 31/03/2017 OP3 contacted the complainant to visit the office and to take the delivery of the parcel from the office as they received open parcel and also weight very less in comparison to the details mentioned on the receipt by OP NO 4.  On 31/03/2017 complainant visited the office of OP NO 3 and parcel was opened by officials of OP NO 3 after doing its weight which was 4200 grams only  and full description inventory was made along with photography by the officials of the OP NO 3 and attested carbon copy of same was given to the complainant (Annexure C4) . The parcel of the complainant was about 4900 grams less in weight having 4 pieces of ordered suit cloth material that too got damaged and two other torn pieces of cloth looking like cushion cover and bed cover and same were acknowledged by the officials of the OP NO 3. It was assured by OP2 and OP 3 that the compensation for damage article will be provided and lost articles will be found soon and also departmental enquiry will be conducted within 45 days and after enquiry the damage articles or compensation for lost articles will be given in case not found by department. The complainant visited many times to the office of OP No 2  &  OP No 3 as the lost articles were required early due to family wedding but every time a lame excuse is given to the complainant by the officials of OP No. 2 & OP No. 3 and they did not pay any heed to genuine request of the complainant. OP No 1 stated in their written version that the OP No 1 had booked the said article under registered parcel and was keeping track on the said parcel and she was informing to the complainant about its movement from time to time . Copies of the parcel Post tracking information slip dated 27.03.2017,28.03.2017, 30.033.2017, 31.03.2017 and 01.04.2017 are submitted herewith collectively marked as (Annexure R 1 ) OP No. 1 also submits copy of the current status of the registered parcel collectively marked as (Annexure R 2). Copy of the invoice dated 22.03.2017 containing the particulars of items sent in the registered parcel is submitted as ( Annexure R 3).The OP No. 1 also stated that when the said article was sent by registered parcel, it was intact otherwise the OP No. 4 would not at all have accepted any damaged parcel. The weight of the said parcel was also duly recorded as 9000grams (9kg). OP No 2, 3 & 4 stated in their written version that the parcel was booked under registration No. CI046845159In and consigned to ID RMS in sound condition through bag No. CBI0000707086 duly entered at SR. No 02 of the parcel list dated 22.03.2017 at 13 :14hrs for dispatch to its destination at Amritsar ( copy of parcel list is attached as Annexure R/1) . Further OPs admitted the Para No 5 of the complaint  which stated that on dated 31/03/2017 complainant visited the office of OP NO 3 and received damage parcel and also less in weight. As per postal manual V, Chapter 3, clause 196 “ when an article is received bearing signs of damage or tempering, in a post office for delivery whether in a protecting bag or cover or without protection, the postmaster should carefully scrutinize and weight the same and preserve the same in his personal custody. An intimation about the damage in form R.P 63 should be served to the addressee. The article should be opened only after the addressee has signed the receipt. The postmaster may open it if the addressee so desires in the addressee‘s  presence. If the contents are found by the addressee to be correct , the acknowledgement of any ,got signed by him or her. The weight of all the items of contents should be ascertained and noted in the inventory in case of any abstraction alleged. The copy of same is attached as Annexure R.4 & R.5.

8        We are of the considered view that in the present complaint the OP No 1 did all her duties which were possible for the benefit of the complainant . The OP No 1 did not act negligently in dealing the subject matter of the complainant. However , OP No 2 to OP No 4 admitted in their plea that as per booking receipt enclosed with the application the said parcel was sent to post office in sealed condition by MS Bhavna Nimgaonkar and being a sealed parcel the contents as stated to be clothes material . The parcel was not presented with any invoice of contents . But the question arises here whether the complainant received the parcel with the same weight as the parcel booked under receipt Docket Number CI046845159IN at Sudama Nagar Post Office Indore on dated 22/03/2017 , which was 9000 grams (annexure C1) . However ,as per Annexure R4, R3 &R5 attached by OP 2 ,3 & 4, it was cleared that the parcel received by the complainant was less in weight the same was opened by officials of OP No. 3 at their office dated 31/03/2017 after doing its weight which amount to 4200 grams only and some items are also missing from the parcel and some are not belong to the complainant .

Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the act 1986:-

“Consumer” means any person who:-

Hires or avails  any services of a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised or under any system or deferred payment when such service are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person but it does not include a person who availed of such service for any commercial Purpose .

The stand Taken by the OP is that the contents and value of the postal article were not disclosed by the sender and the sender sent the alleged valuables by violating the speed post rules. Further, it has been argued that the central government or its postal officers are exempted from any liability or loss miss delivery of delay or damage to any postal article in course of transmission by post as per section 6 of the Indian post office act 1898 section 6 of the Indian post office Act read as under:-

“Exemption from liability for , miss delivery ,delay or damage:-  the government shall not incur any liability by reason of the loss, miss 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 hereinafter provided and no officer of the post office shall incur any liability by reason of any such loss, miss delivery, delay or damage unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his willful act or default.

9        After going through the fact of the case we are of the opinion that even if the contents of the parcel were not disclosed by the complainant it was open for the opposite party to insist the complainant to disclose the same. however in the present Case no such effort was made by the opposite party further there is a duty cast upon the postal authorities to deliver the consignment to the consignee in its original form without causing any damage to it having accepted the same after collecting the requisite charges. The consignment was in the custody of the postal department and requisite fees was also paid by the complainant for its safe delivery but the opposite party miserably failed to perform it’s duties properly and the parcel was received by complainant in tempered condition with less in weight. We are of the opinion that it was a fit case for holding a department inquiry or to fix the responsibility of the delinquent but the opposite party has not produced any ‘action taken report' to show whether proper procedure was adopted to pinpoint the delinquent employee. In the absence of that it is clearly established that there was a willful default on the part of the OP. No responsibility was fixed by the postal authorities all this show that opposite party is shielding it’s official by not initiating an inquiry in the matter and there was a willful act or default on the part of the opposite party. Here we are fortified by the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble National Commission in case postmaster General Kerala& Ors. Vs kiron Rasheed ,2011(2) CPC(NC)328, where in it was held that the provisions of section 6 of the post office act,1898 can’t  be applied to modernize forms of transaction such as speed post and email etc. And the order passed by the Kerala State consumer disputes redressal commission in favour of the consumer was upheld. It is pertinent to mention here that there was tampering with the parcel sent and some articles were found missing , when packet reached its destination, clearly falls within the meaning of ‘deficiency in service ' under section 2(1) (g) & (o) of the Act 1986.

10      In view of the above discussion , we are of the opinion that the present complaint deserves to succeed and the same is accordingly allowed. The OPs are directed to pay Rs. 30,570/- paid by the complainant regarding article in question. The complainant has been harassed by the opposite parties unnecessarily for a long time. The complainant is also entitled to Rs. 8,000/-( Rs. Eight Thousand only) as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony and Rs 7,500/-/- (Rs. Seven Thousand Five Hundred only) as litigation expenses. Opposite Parties are directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of complaint till its realisation. Copy of order will be supplied by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar to the parties as per rules. File be sent back to the District consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar.

Announced in Open Commission

26.8.2022