DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 27th day of January 2017
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member Date of filing: 16/10/2015
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
(C.C.No.145/2015)
C.Ravindran,
Chottathodi House,
Vaniamkulam Post,
Ottappalam Post,
Palakkad - Complainant
(By Party in Person)
V/s
1.Sivaramakrishnan,
Postman,
Vaniamkulam Post,
Ottapalam, Palakkad
2.Nirmalakumar Menon
Divisional Superintendent
Ottapalam Divison,
(India Post),
Dept.of Post Offices,
Ottapalam Palakkad - Opposite parties
(By Adv.Sasikumaran)
O R D E R
By Shri. V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
Brief facts of the case.
The complainant sent 10 registered letters and three e mails between 9/7/2014 and 1/10/2015 to the Postal Division Superintendent of Ottappalam and Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Palakkad stating his complaint and the responsible postal superintendent ignored his genuine demand and tried to protect their delivery staff responsible to return the valued help from the Govt.authority of Norka Roots. The complainant appeals that he is the only working person and with his income day to day expenses of his family are met. Following a sudden heart attack at his work place on 3/8/2013, he lost his job with no income to look after his family. He has no pension, being a private service worker. He spent about Rs.5 lakhs for heart related treatments with various hospitals including Daya Hospital International, Trichur. He applied for financial help from Norka Roots which is a Kerala Govt.Enterprises and the then Minister Sri.K.C.Joseph approved the help of Rs.50,000/- on 1/1/2014. According to the complainant he was eagerly waiting for the helping amount in every day post and frequently made telephonic enquiries to the Trivandrum Norka Roots Office. Then he came to know that his delivery area post man Mr.Sivaramakrishnan, returned the above article without a word with him or his family, staying nearby. The complainant heard news of return of postal article, a few months later, when he enquired about non availability of the Minister approved amount. On contacting Ottapalam Divisional Superintendent, the complainant knew that there is another Ravindran on the same address who is working abroad. The complainant appeals that he was suffering from high tension. The above post man has a practice to put pressure on the consignee for his personal benefit. Also the postal divisional Superintendent Sri.Nirmal kumar Menon, is also equally responsible for the irregularity and unsettling of the case for a long time.
The complainant therefore prays to the Hon’ble Forum to order for compensation to him for the mental tension, financial loss, travels, telephone calls, internet contacts on the occasion of his life saving situation. He claims a relief compensation of Rs.50,000/- from opposite parties 1 & 2.
The complaint was admitted and notice was issued to opposite parties.
In their version and affidavit on behalf of opposite parties 1 & 2, the opposite party No.2 denied all the allegations and averments in the complaint except those specifically admitted. It is admitted that the complainant had preferred a complaint to the second opposite party alleging irregular return of a registered letter addressed to him. As per enquiries conducted by second opposite party it was revealed that the registered letter addressed to the complainant was received at Vaniyamkulam Post Office in June 2014 and Mr.Ravindran, Chottathodi House, Vaniyamkulam, working abroad is known to opposite party No.1 and the registered letter was returned to sender with remarks “left India”. Later on the complainant came to the post office claiming to be the addressee of the registered letter from “Norka Roots”. Opposite party No.1 explicitly confirms that the complainant is not residing within the delivery jurisdiction of Vaniyamkulam Post Office since 1991 and he is not known to him, because the complainant is residing in the delivery area of Shornur Post Office for the last so many years. Further second opposite party also contends that during the enquiry before the enquiry officer, the complainant deposed that he was expecting a registered letter from Norka Roots and had informed his family members to intimate its arrival at Vaniyamkulam post office. If the complainant is staying at Vaniyamkulam, the arrival of the letter would be known to him and there is no need to alert the family members about this. The complainant’s statement is a solid evidence that he is not a permanent resident in the above address at Vaniyamkulam. Hence, post office has no responsibility to deliver a postal article to a person who is not residing in the address and not know to the post office. The post master disposed off the postal article as per the rules laid down as per clause 74(b) of the Post Office Guide Part 1. As per the enquiry conducted by the Asst. Superintendent of Post Offices, another Ravindran in the same address is permanently staying at Vaniyamkulam delivery area and the first opposite party naturally thought that he is the actual addressee of impugned registered letter as no other person in the same name and address was staying anywhere in the Vaniyamkulam delivery area. The said Ravindran was working abroad when the registered letter under complaint came at Vaniyamkulam Post Office and hence the remarks “left India” were written by the post man and the article was returned to the sender after observing the usual proceedings in this matter by the Post Master of Vaniyamkulam post office. Opposite parties admit that the parents of the complainant were residing in the Vaniyamkulam Post office delivery area. According to opposite parties since the complainant was not residing in the Vaniyamkulam delivery area the concerned post man did not know such a person and the claim of the complainant that he was residing at Vaniyamkulam did not stand as per annexure R1 the complainant has also admitted that he has received the registered letter subsequently in the address “C.Ravindran, Chottathodi house, Shornur” on 8/7/2014; another registered letter with No.RL887377523IN of Ottappalam was also delivered to the complainant at his Shornur address on 22/8/2014. These two letters show that complainant is a permanent resident of Shornur Post office delivery area otherwise the shornur post office post man would not have delivered the two registered letters to the complainant. Further detailed enquiries made by opposite parties on the complaint show that the complainant is permanently residing within the delivery jurisdiction of Shornur Post officer in house No. 16/461 of Shornur Muncipality. The post man of beat No. 3 of Shornur Post Office, Chuduvalathur locality since February 2003 upto March 2014 explicitly states in his statement given before IP(PG) Ottappalam on 28/11/2015 that the complainant is a permanent resident of Shoranur Post office delivery area in the Chuduvalathur locality and he delivered letters to the complainant in the said address. When the post man was transferred as cash oversear in 2014 March another post man (Mr.P R Dileep) was working as post man at Shornur in Beat No.3 which is the delivery area of the residence of the complainant. A true copy of the attendance registers show that both Mohanan and Dileep were working in the Shornur Post Office. Dileep working as Post Man since March 2014 clearly deposed in his statement given before IP(PG) Ottappalam on 26/11/2015 that the complainant is a permanent resident at Shornur Chuduvalathur locality for the last seven years. The opposite parties having conducted further enquiries which showed that Mr.Raveendran was permanently residing in the delivery jurisdiction of shornur post office in the Chuduvalathur locality. In the front gate of the house is clearly displayed “ Ravindran Chottathodi”. A part of his house is let out in the tenancy name “ Jayasree Quarters” in ward no: 16, house no:461, of Shoranur Municipality. Mr. Raveendran, his wife Smt. Jayasree and his daughter Smt.Priya Raveendran have electoral voter’s identity card obtained with numbers: DLL1355882(Serial No-1099), KL08/044/444434( serial no-1100) and DLL1992726 ( Serial no-1101) respectively which appear in the voters list of ward No-16 of Shoranur Municipality. Mr. Raveendran has residential address at Shoranur which is evident from his ration card no.1948061964 obtained on 24/12/2008. In response to the letter dated 02/12/2015 of second opposite party, Village officer of Vaniyamkulam Ist village intimated that the complainant is a permanent resident of Shoranur for the last 15 years. Hence complaint is biased and filed with ill motive and malafide intentions of misguiding the Honorable Forum and get compensation by illegal and crooked methods, according to opposite parties who prayed to the Honorable Forum for a deterrent action against the complainant. Also, there is immunity Under Section 3 Sub Section (c) of the Indian Post Office Act 1898 from any liability for loss or misdelivery which opposite parties do not want to utilize in this case. Sec3(c) of Post office Act 1898 defined the term “ delivery of postal article” as per Annexure R12. Annexure R13 and Annexure R15 proved that complainant is a permanent resident of Shoranur Municipality and not having a house/office in the delivery area of Vaniyamkulam post office. According to opposite parties the complainant left the place 15 years back and no liability for the post office to deliver any postal articles addressed to his parents because he is not residing within the delivery area of Vaniyamkulam post office. Since the complainant is a permanent resident in the delivery area of the Shornur Post office, in Chuduvalathoor locality, it is not binding on the department to ensure delivery of registered letter to the addressee who is not known to the postman of Vaniyamkulam post office and whose whereabouts are not known to him. Hence no willful negligence on the part of 1st opposite party and no deficiency of service on the part of the department happened. Hence complainants allegation and claim for compensation is baseless.
A copy of the approved application for renewal of the ration card with number 1948061964 clearly establishes the residence details of the complainant applicant in Shoranur and this application is approved by Taluk Supply Officer, Ottapalam. To the letter by 2nd opposite party dated 8/4/16 to the Secretary, Vaniyamkulam Panchayath the Secretary gave a reply stating that there is no house in the name of Ravindran, S/o.Kesavan, Chottathodi House, after examining the records in his office. Further enquiry revealed no knowledge about their permanent residence in this Panchayath. Further in the delivery slip of Vaniyamkulam Post Office of the 1st opposite party, it is proved that the pass port under complaint was returned to the Passport Officer as the complainant resides at Shoranur.
Hence the opposite parties pray to the Honorable Forum that there being non deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties in delivering postal articles to the complainant. Services rendered by the department are based on established Rules and Regulations. No provision to deliver a registered letter to an addressee not at all residing in the said address unless specific instructions are given in right time. The complaint to the Honorable Forum is fictitious and with malafide intentions. Hence this complaint should be dismissed as per section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 with cost and compensation to opposite parties.
The complainant and Opposite party filed chief affidavits. The opposite party filed IA-135/16 to hear maintainability. Preliminary issue of maintainability can be considered along with the main complaint. Hence IA was closed. Ext. A1 toA11 were marked from the side of the complainant and Exts. B1 to B18 from the part of the opposite parties.
The following issues are considered:-
1.Whether there is any negligence and / or deficiency in service from the side of opposite parties?
2.If so, what is the relief?
Issues 1 & 2
The complainant in this case spent about Rs.5,00,000/- for heart related treatments in various hospitals including Daya Hospital International, Trichur and applied for financial help from Norka Roots which is a Kerala Government Enterprise and got the help of Rs.50,000/- from Kerala Government on 01/02/2014. Later he came to know that first opposite party returned the “helping amount” without a word with him or his family. The complainant claims a relief compensation of Rs.50,000/- from opposite parties 1 and 2 for mental tension and financial loss suffered by him. The complainant has produced documentary evidences to support his claim that he is a permanent resident of the delivery jurisdiction of Vaniyamkulam post office. As per registered letter from Superintendent of Post offices, Ottappalam dated 25/06/2015, there is one more Ravindran who is having the same address “Chottathodi house, Kothayur, Vaniyamkulam post” under Vaniyamkulam post office and the complainant is residing at Chuduvalathur, Shoranur post office for the last 7 years and the other Ravindran is working abroad. The disputed article did not contain the full address of the complainant , without mentioning the name of his father and hence the delivery staffs could not identify the correct address. Since the complainant is residing at Chuduvalathur, Shoranur for the last seven years, question of intimation does not arise. Residential certificate was obtained by the complainant on 20/06/2016 from Ottapalam block office which means that he was resident in Chottathodi house, 3/364, Kothayur, Vaniyamkulam since 20/06/2016 and not from an earlier date. His complaint letter was dated 09/07/2014 as to allegation against OP1 and the complaint was given to the Honorable Forum on 16/10/2015. Residential certificate was issued by Vaniyamkulam Grama Panchayath on 07/09/2016. Further, in the certificate dated 27/08/2014 given by the secretary Vaniyamkulam Grama Panchayath, 19/08/2014 was seen corrected as 19/08/2013 without the attestation of the certificate issuing authority. Moreover the certificate was dated 27/08/2014. Therefore how is it possible to certify on 27/08/2014 that complainant was permanently residing from 19/08/2013? Hence this certificate dated 27/08/2014 cannot be accepted as a proper documentary evidence to prove the case of the complainant.
The possession certificate dated 13/02/2013 issued to the complainant cannot be accepted as a proof of residence of the complainant because this certificate shows the possession of various properties by the complainant. As per authorization letter dated 20/09/2014 marked as Ext.A11, authorizing the post master, Vaniyamkulam post office to deliver the registered letters, insured articles, parcels , money orders addressed to the complainant, to his father Sri. C.Kesavan was seen given after the occurrence of the disputed non-delivery of the registered letter. From the point of view of the opposite parties the post master has disposed off the postal article as per rules laid down as per clause 74(b) of the Post Office Guide part 1. The complainant admitted having received the registered letter addressed to him subsequently in his Shoranur address on 08/07/2014 vide Ext.B1 and another registered letter addressed to the complainant was seen delivered to him at his shoranur address on 22/08/2014 vide Ext.B6. As per the deposition dated 28/11/2015 made by Mr.Mohanan who was the post man of Beet No.3 in the Chuduvalathur locality of the Shornur Post Office between February 2013 and March 2014 to IP(PG) Ottapalam explicitly states that the complainant is a permanent resident of Shornur Post Office delivery area in the Chuduvalathur locality and he delivered letters to the complainant in the said address vide Ext.B7. When the post man was transferred in March 2014, another post man namely Mr.P.R.Dileep was working as post man in beet No.3, Shornur which is the delivery area of the residence of the complainant. He also clearly deposed in his statement given before IP(PG) Ottapalam on 26/11/2015 that the complainant is permanent residence at Shornur, Chuduvalathur locality for the last 7 years vide Ext.B10.
As per Ext.B11 which is voters list of ward no-16 of Shoranur Municipality, the complainant’s name appears as serial no-1099 with electoral, voters, identity card no being DLL1355882. In the ration card of the complainant the residential address is mentioned as Shoranur address vide Ext. B12- Ration card no-1948061964 was obtained on 24/12/2008. As per Ext. B14 the village officer of Vaniyamkulam 1st village intimated that the complainant was a permanent resident of Shoranur for the last 15 years to the query made by OP2 addressed to the village officer as per Ext. B13. From the approved application for the renewal of the ration card with no.1948061964 it is clearly established that the residence details of the complainant applicant is mentioned as Shoranur vide Ext.B15. To the letter by OP1 dated 08/04/2016 to the secretary Vaniyamkulam Grama Panchayath which is marked as Ext.B16, Secretary gave a reply which is marked as Ext. B17 which stated that there is no house in the name of Sri.Ravindran , S/o.Kesavan, Chottathodi House after examining the records in this office. Further enquiry revealed no knowledge about the complainant’s permanent residence in the Panchayath.
As per the Ext. B18 which is the delivery slip of the Vaniyamkulam post office of the OP1 it is proved that the passport under complaint was returned to the passport officer because the complainant was residing at Shoranur.
From the above, we observed that the complainant could not establish that he was a permanent resident of Vaniyamkulam post office delivery area and could not prove that there has occurred negligence and deficiency of service from the side of opposite parties.
Therefore the complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 27th day of January 2017.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R.
President
Sd/-
Suma.K.P.
Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 – Original Post Letter dated 29/01/2013
Ext.A2 - Original Post Letter dated 23/10/2013
Ext.A3 - Original Post Letter dated 23/07/2014
Ext.A4 - Original Post Letter dated 14/08/2014
Ext.A5 – Original Post Letter dated 10/10/2014
Ext.A6 - Original Postal Receipt and acknowledgement card dated 10/11/14
Ext.A7 - Photocopy of Passports No.M350496 verified with original
Ext.A8 – Photocopy of Passports No.C403280 verified with original
Ext.A9 – Photocopy of Passports No.A2055223 verified with original
Ext.A10 – Photocopy of Passports No.N5173718 verified with original
Ext.A11 – Original Authority letter from Vaniamkulam post office dated 20/09/2014.
Witness examined on the side of complainant
PW1 – Abraham.T.V
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Ext.B1 – True copy of complaint lodged by the complainant dated 9/7/2014
Ext.B2 – True copy of enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer
Ext.B3 – True copy of the statement dated 20/8/2014 given by the said postman
before the enquiry officer
Ext.B4 – True copy of the statement given before the enquiry officer dated
25/8/2014
Ext.B5 – True copy of the envelop of the said Registered Letter under
No.RL887377523IN of Ottapalam
Ext.B6 – True copy of the delivery slip dated 22/8/14 of Shornur Post office
Ext.B7 – True coy of the statement of Mohanan working as Postman, Shornur
Ext.B8– True copy of the attendance register of Shornur Post Office, for the month of
February 2003.
Ext.B9 – True copy of the attendance register of Shornur Post Office, for the month of
February 2014.
Ext.B10 – True copy of the statement of Dileep before IP (PG)
Ext.B11 – True copy of the voters list of Ward No.16 of Shoranur Municipality
Ext.B12 – True copy of ration card No.1948061964
Ext.B13 – True copy of letter dated 2/12/15
Ext.B14– True copy of reply received from Village Officer, Vaniyamkulam 1 village
Ext.B15 – Copy of Ration Card application
Ext.B16 – True copy of letter dated 8/4/16 addressed to Secretary, Vaniyakulam
Grama Panchayath
Ext.B17 – Reply from the Secretary, Vaniyamkulam Gramapanchayath dated 15/4/16
Ext.B18 – Copy of delivery slip of Speed post articles dated 22/12/15
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
DW1 – Dileepkumar.J.S
Cost
No cost allowed.
