Justice Pritam Pal, President 1. This appeal by complainant is directed against the order dated 23.9.2009 passed by District Consumer Forum-I, U.T. Chandigarh whereby his complaint bearing No.528 of 2009 was allowed partly in the following terms ; “ The OPs are directed to refund the amount of Rs.777/- to the Complainant, within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which to pay the same along with penal interest @12% p.a. since the date of receipt i.e. 11.12.2008, along with litigation costs of Rs.1100/- till the payment is actually made to the Complainant.” 2. The parties hereinafter shall be referred to as per their status before the District Consumer Forum. 3. In nutshell, the facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant on 11.12.2008 sent a parcel containing medicines worth Rs.7859/- to one Sh.Paramjit Singh at 46, Kenashiro St.Brehmton, Ontarico, Canada, Pin Code L6 P1 G8, through OP No.2 Post Office on payment of Rs.777/- vide receipt Annexure C-1, but the same neither reached the addressee nor was sent back to the sender till 21.1.2009. The complainant then wrote letter to OP NO.2 to enquire about the status of the delivery of the parcel. It was averred that Sh.Paramjit Singh, who was an old patient of complainant was in dire need of said medicines which could not reach him, therefore he had to again send the same medicines worth Rs.7859/- to Sh.Paramjit Singh through another parcel on 30.1.2009 on payment of Rs.1094/- vide Annexure C-5. The second parcel sent to Sh.Paramjit Sigh was delivered but the earlier parcel was neither delivered to Paramjit Singh nor returned to the complainant till the filing of the complaint. Hence, alleging deficiency in service complainant filed complaint before the District Forum seeking cost of the medicine, compensation for harassment and mental agony besides refund of postal charges and costs of litigation. 4. On the other hand, the case of OPs before the District Forum was that the first parcel sent by complainant on 11.12.2008 was duly despatched to Toronto (Canada) on 14.12.2008 and this was informed to the complainant vide Annexure-1 dated 22.4.2009. It was also asked from the Complainant that if he wanted to pursue the inquiry further, he was to furnish the detail in the enclosed reclamation performa, which was duly filled in by the complainant and the same was forwarded to Sr. Supdt. of Air Mail Sorting Division, New Delhi vide letter dated 30.4.2009 to conduct further enquiries from the Foreign Postal Authorities (Canada), and the same was pending with Foreign Administration of Canada. The maintainability of the complaint was questioned in terms of Section 6 of Indian Post Office Act, 1898 and a prayer was made for dismissal of the complaint. 5. The District Consumer Forum after going through the evidence and hearing the counsel for parties allowed the complaint as indicated in the opening part of this judgment. Still dissatisfied, complainant has come up in this appeal. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the file carefully. The sole point of arguments raised on behalf of the appellant/complainant is that the learned District Forum has only awarded Rs.777/- as postal charges and Rs.1100/- as litigation costs and failed to appreciate the mental agony of the patient/addressee who was in dire need of the medicines which were despatched on 11.12.2008 but the same were not delivered to him and he had to face great hardship for which no compensation has been awarded by the Forum to the appellant as well as his patient for mental tension, harassment and cost of medicine. The learned counsel further stated that after the decision of the complaint the complainant has received a communication from the department of posts dated 1.10.2009 in which the postal department has admitted that the disputed articles were forwarded to the Foreign Administration Canada in safe and sound condition and reclamation enquiry was sent on 26.5.2009 vide which the postal administration of Canada has authorized the OPs to compensate the appellant of the article as no trace and track is available of the said article and has sanctioned a sum of Rs.1935/- being full liability equivalent to 30 SDR as per Article 29 of UPU Convention Rules. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the entire matter and find that there is no allegation in the complaint that the postal article was lost by any official of OPs intentionally and fraudulently. In fact, as per OPs the postal article had reached the Canadian territory and thereafter, its whereabouts were not known. According to the letter dated 1.10.2009 the Postal Administration of Canada has authorized the OPs vide their reference No.7306965 to compensate the sender of the article as no trace and track is available of the said article. Thus, the question of any of the officials being liable to misplace the postal article or to withhold the same, does not arise. Section -6 of the Indian Post Office Act provides immunity to OPs according to which OPs do not incur any liability by reason of the loss of a postal article in course of transmission by post and no officer of the post office shall incur any liability by reason of any said loss unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his willful act or default. As discussed above, it is not the case of the Complainant, if any of the officials had fraudulently or by his willful act or default caused loss to the postal article. 8. OPs had already sanctioned a sum of Rs.1935/- equivalent to 30SDR as per Article 29 of UPU Convention Rules as mentioned in para-9 of the grounds of appeal. This amount if so far has not been paid to the complaint, the same shall be paid within two weeks from the date copy of order is received. This amount shall be in addition to the amounts already awarded by the District Forum. 9. In this view of the matter, we find that the impugned order passed by the District Forum is quite reasonable and no interference is called for therein. Consequently the appeal fails and same is hereby dismissed, with no order as to costs. Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge. The file be consigned to record room.
| | HON'BLE MRS. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT | , | | 
