Orissa

Cuttak

CC/191/2023

Sunil Kumar Rath - Complainant(s)

Versus

Post Master,Balangiri Head Office - Opp.Party(s)

self

17 Feb 2024

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.191/2023

 

Sunil Kumar Rath,

S/o:Simanchal Rath,Plot No.3C/876,

Sector-10,CDA,Cuttack-753014.                                   ... Complainant.

 

          Vrs.

 

Post Master,Bolangir Head Post Office,

Rugudi Para,Bolangar,Odisha-767001.                     … Opp. Party.

 

 

Present:         Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                      Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    05.06.2023

Date of Order:  17.02.2024

 

For the complainant:           Self.

For the O.P                :           Mr. B.S.Rayguru(CGC).   

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President          

Case of the complainant as made out from his complaint petition in short is that he had booked a parcel through speed post bearing Endowment No.EO752110059IN on dated 10.4.2023 through the Indian Postal Service,Barpali Sub-Post office to Kalahandi Risida Sub-Post office but the said parcel was lost without being delivered.  The complainant has filed copy of the tracking report to that effect.  The petitioner had sent a Sambalpuri Patta(saree) cost of Rs.31,500/- by Indian Postal Department and had paid the parcel charge of Rs.59/- but without being delivered the said parcel was lost at Bolangir Head Post office.  The matter was reported to the Customer Care representative but the complainant could not get any response for which his problem remained unsolved.  The complainant had made several attempts and efforts in order to get back his article but had failed for which, he had sent legal notice to the O.P on 30.4.2023 and ultimately, he had to file this case seeking refund of Rs.31,500/- towards cost of the saree alongwith Rs.59/- which as paid by him towards the cost of the speed post.  He has further prayed for compensation from the O.P for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and further prayed for any other order as deemed fit and proper.

          Alongwith his complaint petition, the complainant has filed a copy of document in order to prove his case.

2.       The O.P has contested this case and has filed his written version wherein he has mentioned that one speed post article bearing No. EO752110059IN was booked at Barpali Sub-Post office on 10.4.2023 with delivery destination to be Risida Sub-Post Office in the district of Kalahandi.  The said article was received by the National Sorting Hub,Sambalpur on the same day and was despatched to Intra Circle Hub(ICH),Bolangir on 11.4.2023 which was received there at ICH,Bolangir on 17.4.2023.  Thereafter, the whereabouts of the said article is not found.  But according to the O.P. the case as filed by the complainant is not maintainable which is liable to be rejected.  The case of the complainant is also barred for non-joinder of necessary parties.  The O.P has urged that it is the Intra Circle Hub,Bolangir which is solely responsible for the transmission of the article to the delivery office and he has no role to play therein.  Accordingly, it is prayed by the present O.P to dismiss the complaint petition as filed.

          Together with his written version, the O.P has filed copies of several documents in order to support his stand.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of the O.P, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion here in this case.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P ?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Issue no.ii.

Out of the three issues, issue no.ii being a pertinent issue, is taken up first to be considered here in this case.

After perusing the complaint petition, the written version, the written notes of submissions as filed from either sides as well as the documents available in the case record, it is noticed that admittedly an article was booked at Barpali Sub-Post office bearing No. EO752110059IN on 10.4.2023 having it’s destination point to be Risida Sub-Post office,Kalahandi.  The postal charge of Rs.59/- was paid to that effect.  According to the copy of the tracking report as filed by the complainant here in this case together with his complaint petition, the said consignment which was booked at Barpali Sub Post office on 10.4.2023 was delivered on 17.4.2023 at Bolangir Intra Circle Hub.  The O.P who happens to be the Post-Master of Bolangir,Head Post Office, has stated that it is the Intra Circle Hub,Bolangir which is responsible for non-delivery of the said article at Kalahandi Risida Sub-Post office.  The complainant has not added the Post-Master of Risida Sub-Post office,Kalahandi as a party in this case.  Though it is alleged by the complainant that the said article was not delivered, he has not added the Post-master of Risida Sub Post office,Kalahandi as a party in this case.  The claim of the complainant that he had booked a parcel containing Sambalpuri Patta worth of Rs.31,500/- lacks any cogent proof to that effect.  It is because, the complainant has not filed any money receipt to that effect and if the said saree of that amount was infact booked by him at the Barpali Sub Post office on 10.4.2023 vide booking No. EO752110059IN.  That apart, it is not understood as to why had the complainant not insured his parcel which, according to him was containing a valuable saree of Sambalpuri Patta worth of Rs.31,500/-.  Thus, this Commission cannot come to a definite conclusion that indeed, the complainant had sent by booking on 10.4.2023 a Sambalpuri Patta saree worth of Rs.31,500/- at Barpali Sub-Post office which he had intended to be sent to Risida Sub Post office,Kalahandi.  He has also not mentioned as to for whom he had sent the said parcel and the address of the consignee.  Moreso, the complainant has urged to have reported the matter to the customer care of the postal department, but there is absolutely no evidence to that effect.  These lacuna as noticed in the case of the complainant castes a shadow of doubt on the case for which this Commission is unable to arrive at a definite finding in order to implicate the particular O.P as arrayed in this case to be deficient in his service in any manner.  Accordingly, this issue is answered.

Issues no. i & iii.

Non-joinder of necessary parties like the Post-Master of Risida Sub-Post Office of Kalahandi as well as the Post-Master of Barpali Sub-Post office and misjoinder of party here in this case seriously affects the maintainability of the case of the complainant which after considering the facts and circumstances of the case can be concluded that the case of the complainant is not maintainable.  Accordingly, the complainant is not found to be entitled for any of the reliefs here in this case.

                                              ORDER

Case is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 17^th day of February,2024 under the seal and signature of this Commission.                                                                                                           

                                                                                  Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                            President

                   Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                          Member