By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
- The complaint in short is as follows:-
The complainant was a student under second opposite party who joined in MBA, Hospital Management course during the period 2014 – 2016. She appeared for first year examination in May 2015 and she received mark list for the first year examination during 2016 January. On 26/06/2015 the complainant remitted tuition fee Rs.7,200/- through federal bank, Perinthalmanna towards further period. The complainant ought to have appeared for the examination held in 2016 May but due to financial stringency she could not remit the examination fee. So, she could remit examination fee during December 2016 only and she appeared for examination. Due to non-appearance for the examination during 2016 May she was required to remit 3,850/- rupees as arrear amount but that also complainant could remit only on 15/06/2017 through SBI Manjeri. The complainant contacted the second opposite party several times for the documents through email and also through telephone, but there was no response from the second opposite party. The complainant later received a reply from the second opposite party stating that the article had sent to the Chembrasseri post office instead of the address furnished before the university. On 25/06/2019 complainant directly reached at university and enquired the matter and she received certain documents including course completion certificate and transfer certificate. It was learned from the university that the mark list of the complainant and provisional certificate were sent through registered post. It is also learned that the articles had issued on 22/10/2018. The complainant directly approached the second opposite party after sending massages for the same purpose. Complainant enquired about documents since she was not received the documents and to know that whether it was returned to the second opposite party itself or not. But there was no a proper reply from the second opposite party. The advice from the opposite party was to apply for a duplicate certificate. The direction was to pay Rs.9,000/- towards second year mark list, consolidate mark list and provisional certificate. The complainant was not able to remit the huge amount.
2. Thereafter the complainant due to non-receipt of the document again approached Chembrasseri post office and they informed that there is no register for the period of 2018 October. Thereafter complainant continuously approached the post office and the information was that they can do tracking only for 3 months .Thereafter on 26/06/2019 complainant sent message to the postal department and the same was forwarded to Pandikkad Post office but there was no reply. Complainant submitted that she had sent mail to the university informing them non receipt of certificate on 14/11/2017. But no reply was received from the university. The complainant had sent message to the university in email address also. At last it was learned that the university issued certificate via speed post on 22/10/2018. But there was no intimation regarding sending documents either through mobile alert or through e-mail address. The complainant says that if there was a message of issuance of certificate, the complainant could have collected the articles from the post office .Thereafter the complainant sent complaint through email to the postal department on 26/06/2019 and on the same day the complainant received a reply stating that article was sent from Coimbatore head office to the Pandikkad post office .The complainant submitted that during December there was an interview before a reputed company but she could not appear due to want of documents. The complainant again complained on 21/12/2019 before the ASP customer service circle office, Trivandrum as a result of that there was message to concerned parties to resolve the issue. But there was no redressal of grievance. The complainant was in urgent need of document and the message issued for that purpose on 28/12/2019. Thereafter complainant sent message to the public grievance cell of first opposite party.
3. Due to the non-tracing of certificates, complainant caused loss of decent job opportunities and thereby suffered financial loss and mental agony. The complainant prays for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- along with cost of Rs.25,000/-. The complainant also prays to refund Rs.3,000/- remitted to apply three certificates which lost due to defective service of opposite parties.
4. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite parties and they entered appearance and filed version. The first opposite party submitted that the disputed article ET 674449929IN had booked on 22/10/2018 from Coimbatore. The complainant came to know about the dispatch of her certificate from second opposite party on 25/06/2019 when she visited Bharathiyar University. The second opposite party had not informed the complainant about the dispatch of the articles till 8 months and if that was done, she could have more cautious about the delivery of the articles. The contention of the first opposite party is that enquires regarding domestic speed post articles shall be accepted only within a period of one month from the date of booking of the articles which is a departmental order dated 14/06/1990. The complainant registered the complaint only on 26/06/2019 by sending e-mail to the department after 8 months from the date of booking of the article. The opposite party is not able to attend the complaint after the prescribed time as the relevant records in the office concerned would have been destroyed in the usual course as the preservation period of speed post-delivery related documents are only six months. The opposite party submits that a claim for compensation if any should be preferred by the sender, not by the addressee. Though the reservation period of delivery of speed post articles only six months, the opposite party has been made to trace out available records at the delivery office, that is Chembrasseri branch office but in vein. On verification the article number ET 674449929IN is addressed to Smt. A.Jumaila reveals that articles as delivered on 25/10/2018.The opposite party contented that while the complainant enquired about the article, Sri. Sudeep. P, the Ex-ABPM ChembrasserI BO failed to give a proper reply to the addressee. The BPM Chembersseri B.O on 25/10/2018, Smt. Vilasini failed to preserve the delivery slip dated 25/10/2018 showing the delivery particulars of speed post article number ET674449929IN booked at Coimbatore HO on 22/10/2018 addressed to Smt. Jumaila. A. It is also submitted that some documents were seen as destroyed by termites and it is presumed that the delivery slip dated 25/10/2018 bearing the signature of the address was one among them. The opposite party proposed to take suitable action against Sri. Sudeep P. ABPM Chembrasseri B.O and Smt. Vilasini, BPM Chembrasseri B.O for the irregularities on their part. The opposite party also submitted that as per records the articles was at Chembrasseri branch office on 25/10/2018 and delivered on the same day. But in case of articles if the address not specific and not addressee specific then the articles may be delivered to anyone in the addressee’s family members who attained 18 years of age under proper identification by the post man. According to opposite party it is not mandatory to deliver the articles to the addressee if the addressee is not available and so it can be delivered to any of the family members. Since the complainant herself has admitted that she will not be available at home during day time there are chances for delivery of the articles to any one of her family members in her address. Opposite party also contended that as per Indian post office rule, in the event of loss of inland speed post article or loss of its contents or damage to the contents compensation shall be double to the amount of speed post charges paid or 1,000/- rupees whichever is less. The department is not liable for the value of the contents but only such compensation available for loss of speed post article as admissible under rules. It is also submitted that section 6 of the Indian post office act exempts post office from liability for loss, miss delivery, delay or damage unless that has been caused fraudulently by his willful act or default. So it can be seen there is no will full act or default on the part of opposite party and as per record it was delivered on 25/10/2018. Hence complaint deserve dismissal with cost of the opposite party.
5. The second opposite party admitted that the complainant enrolled for MBA, Hospital Management course under second opposite party through study center KL0906-SIMS (Saga Institute of Management studies) during June 2014- 2016). The candidate completed her course only on December 2016, the opposite party requested to pay the balance exam fee Rs.3, 850/- on 09/02/2017 through official communication. The complainant sent the same on 15/06/2017 enclosing demand draft No.104963 dated 15/06/2017. The second opposite party sent the MBA grade sheet for the first year through registered post No. 2652NHM 5309/76(ET 547982954IN) and the same has been received the complainant .The complainant requested for transfer certificate on 25/06/2019, the university issued her course completion certificate and transfer certificate on 25/06/2019 and the same has been received in person. Thereafter it is also submitted that after completion of the MBA course the MBA grade sheet for the second year, provisional certificate and consolidated grade sheet have been duly dispatched to the registered address of the candidate mentioned above through registered post on 17/10/2018. The opposite party also submitted that the complaint copy is in Malayalam language and the university has taken for the paying to forward the above details to the knowledge of the Commission.
6. The complainant and first opposite party filed affidavit and documents. Documents on the side of complainant marked as Ext. A1 to A11. Ext. A1 is copy of
E mail messages sent by the complainant dated 10/01/2019 and 11/07/2019. Ext. A2 is copy of messages sent by the complainant dated on 06/01/2020 and also on 22/02/2020. Ext A3 is copy of demand draft dated 15/06/2017 for Rs.3,850/-. Ext. A4 is copy of letter dated 16/12/2016 from Bharathiyar University to complainant. Ext A5 is copy of 2016 December examination results. Ext. A6 is copy of statement of marks of MBA degree examination Dated 09/09/2015. Ext. A7 is copy of transfer certificate of 25/06/2019. Ext. A8 is copy of course completion certificate dated 25/06/2019. Ext. A9 is copy of demand draft for Rs.4, 800/- dated 28/10/2016. Ext. A10 is copy of application form to appear for the arrear examination of December 2016. Ext. A11 is Profile copy of complainant updated on 25/06/2019. The first opposite party filed documents and they are marked as Ext. B1 to B3. Ext. B1 is copy of circular issued by the ministry of communication, department of post regarding preservation of records relating to domestic speed post articles. Ext. B2 is copy of register of VP articles received dated 25/10/2018. Ext. B3 is copy of inland, speed post, tariff.
The complainant and first opposite party present in person before the commission and heard. Second opposite party did not file affidavit. Perused the affidavit and documents.
7. The following points arise for consideration: -
- Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
- Relief and cost?
8. Pont No.1
The grievance of the complaint is that the registered articles related to educational qualifications were not delivered to the complainant and thereby she suffered a lot of miseries that she could not appear for interview, she could not apply for several other important posts, she was dragged to the second opposite party Coimbatore and also to the first opposite party Chembarassery Post office number of times. It is an admitted fact that she was a student of second opposite party for MBA, hospital management course under distance education scheme. She had successfully completed the course. Naturally she will be with great expectation to get a job opportunity on the basis of high education qualification. In this complaint due to non-receipt of the concerned documents from the opposite party the complainant made enquires continuously but there was no proper response from the second opposite party. The complainant was under the impression that the second opposite party may not have issued certificates to the complainant. At last she approached second opposite party in person at Coimbatore on 25/06/2019 and it was learned that the second opposite party had sent her mark lists, provisional certificates and other relevant documents on 22/10/2018 itself with postal register number ET 674449929IN. Some other documents including course completion certificate and transfer certificate were given to the complainant directly on 25/06/2019. The complainant alleges that even without looking in to the fact whether the documents sent through speed post has been returned undelivered ,the complainant was directed to apply duplicate copy with fee of Rs.9,000/-. Complainant being financially not sound approached first opposite party to enquire about the fate of registered article posted by second opposite party in her favor. The first opposite party said that there is no register relating to the articles dealt during 2018 October and as per norms they are able to examine tracking records of 3 months only .Thereafter the complainant sent several messages to the concerned higher authorities of the first opposite party and from there she could realize the fact the articles were rightly posted on 22/10/2018 and it was reached at first opposite party. The first opposite party produced, though they have got a contention no document is available during the period of 2018 October, B2 document covering the relevant period. Ext. B2 clearly shows that as alleged by the complainant and admitted by the first opposite party the disputed article were received by the first opposite party on 25/10/2018. Usually articles received also follows articles dispatched or delivered. The submission of the first opposite party is that the articles involved the complaint was delivered to the complainant unfortunately the records relevant are not able to trace due to lapse of inordinate delay. The first opposite party also submitted that they have proposed to take suitable action against two employees responsible for the situation. Hence it can be seen that the case of the complainant is correct and there is deficiency in service on the part of the first opposite party through non delivery of valuable documents to the addressee.
9. One of the contention on of the first opposite party is that the complainant has not availed any service from the first opposite party and second opposite party is the person who availed the service of the first opposite party through booking a registered article. There is no complaint is registered by the second opposite party who booked the article. Moreover as per Ext. B1 document they are not bound to keep the records beyond 3 months and also a complaint or enquiries regarding domestic speed post articles shall be made within a period of one month from the date of booking of the article. In short the contention of the first opposite party is that there is inordinate delay in booking complaint in this matter. The first opposite party also contended that the complainant even after knowledge of posting of registered articles in her favor she has not approached duly the first opposite party. But it can be seen that the complainant was under the impression that the second opposite party has not issued or sent her documents through postal service. Her communications are evident for that she was making regular enquires with second opposite party. If at all any delay is caused in making complaint the complainant is not liable for that. There is lapse in response from the second opposite party and that caused or availing contention of delay to the first opposite party. As per records of the second opposite party concerned they are under the impression the registered article has been duly served to the complainant. But that contention is not sufficient to rebut the contention of the complainant that there was no proper response or alert from the side of second opposite party. So it can be seen that there is a contributory deficiency in service on the part of second opposite party. In short due to the deficiency in service on the side of both opposite parties the complainant put to irreparable loss and hardships for which both opposite parties are liable to compensate.
10. Point No.2
The perusal of affidavit and documents it can be seen that the complainant is not having sufficient financial support to remit additional fee for the lost documents issued by the second opposite party Bharathiyar University . She had sent messages more than once to the second opposite party regarding the non-receipt of documents. If there was a proper response from the second opposite party the grievance of the complainant could have resolved in an earliest occasion. Even though the second opposite party had sent documents to the complainant, when the same is reported as not received by the addressee, it was proper on the side of second opposite party to respond honestly. The second opposite party has not filed affidavit before the commission and so there is no evidence on behalf of second opposite party before this commission. Considering the nature of lapse on the second opposite party we find a lesser liability to redress the grievance of complainant. But the first opposite party is concerned the responsibility is on higher side. Non delivery of an article to the correct addressee causes extensive inconvenience and hardships to the consumers. The non-delivery of the postal article to the complainant caused much financial and mental hardship to the complainant. Considering the entire aspects and the nature of deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties the commission allows the complaint as follows:-
- The first opposite party is directed to pay 50,000/- (Fifty thousand rupees only) rupees on account of deficiency in service and thereby caused inconvenience and hardships and also financial loss to the complainant.
- The second opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand rupees only) as to the cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
The opposite parties shall comply this order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled 12% interest on entire above said amount of Rs.60,000/- from the date of this order till realization.
Dated this 17th day of February, 2022.
MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant: Ext.A1to A11
Ext.A1: Copy of e mail messages sent by the complainant dated 10/01/2019 and
11/07/2019.
Ext.A2: Copy of messages sent by the complainant dated on 22/02/2020 and also on
06/01/2020.
Ext A3: Copy of demand draft dated 15/06/2017 for Rs.3,850/-.
Ext A4: Copy of letter dated 16/12/2016 from Baharthiyar University to complainant.
Ext A5: Copy of December 2016 examination results.
Ext.A6: Copy of statement of marks of MBA degree examination dated 09/09/2015.
Ext.A7: Copy of transfer certificate 25/06/2019.
Ext A8: Copy of course completion certificate dated 25/06/2019.
Ext A9: Copy of demand draft for Rs.4,800/- dated 28/10/2016.
Ext A10: Copy of application form to appear for the arrear examination December 2016.
Ext. A11: Profile copy of complainant updated on 25/06/2019.
Witness Examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party: Ext. B1 to B3
Ext.B1: Copy of circular issued by the ministry of communication, department of post regarding preservation of records relating to domestic speed post articles.
Ext.B2: Copy of register of VP articles received dated 25/10/2018.
Ext.B3: Copy of inland, speed post, tariff.
MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
