Orissa

Rayagada

CC/261/2015

Sri K.A Ramachandran - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chier Post Master, Rayagada Head Post Office - Opp.Party(s)

Self

14 Oct 2015

ORDER

                           DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

 

C.C. Case  No.261/ 2015.

            P R E S E N T .

            Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

            Smt.  Ch. Nirmala Kumari Raju, LLB,                    Member

 

            Sri K.A.Ramachandran,S/o late N.S.A.Narayana Iyer, Advocate by Profession, aged            67 years, Resident of Raniguda Farm, Near D.F.O, Office 4^th Line, Ring           Road,   Rayagada.

                                                                                                              ……..Complainant

                                                Versus

1. The Chief Post Master, Rayagada Head Post Office, Rayagada.
2. The Superintendent of Post Offices , Koraput Zone, Jeypore.
3.  Post Master General, Orissa, Bhubaneswar.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ……..….Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant:  Self

For the O.Ps: Self

                                                            JUDGMENT

                  The brief facts of the case is that the complainant has  remitted a sum of Rs.1500/- by E.M.O on 27.03.2015 to Sri Ghanashyam Das, Advocate, Srikrishna Vihar, Basundhara Lane – 3 , Bidanasi, Cuttack 14  vide PNR No.088544150327019 R 49 K but till now the said money order was not delivered to the addressee. The complainant personally went to the Post office  several times but they refuse to accept any written complaint and promised to take prompt steps to deliver the .op or to return the same to the complainant. Due to non payment of the above money order the complainant personally attended the said court and incurred a lot of expenses for the said purpose .Hence prayed to direct the O.ps to refund the cash value of aRs.1500/- with the M.O commission of aRs.75/-  and for harassment and mental agony  award compensation  with cost of litigation.

 

                  On being notice the O.Ps appeared and filed their counter. The O.ps submitted that the payment was wrongly noted as Bidanasi Cutttack instead of Avinaba Bidanasi Cuttack in the said emo form and due to this reason emo was misdrawn and misdirected to Kalyaninagar post office. The said emo reached Kalyani Nagar post office on 01.04.2015 after which further disposal is not available as per the web report  and after ascertaining non payment of the said emo O.P 2 has issued order for duplicate MO vide letter web complain  No.75400005407 dt.01.10.2015 which has been already paid to payee on 07.10.2015. On receipt of complaint action was taken to inquire into the matter which took sometime in the official process. The O.ps have acted promptly to pay the MO although there was delay due to some unavoidable circumstances. Hence, prayed to dismiss the case.

                  We perused the case  record, documents, written version  filed by the  parties and  heard arguments from both the parties  It is submitted by the O.Ps that   the payment was wrongly noted as Bidanasi Cutttack instead of Avinaba Bidanasi Cuttack in the said emo form and due to this reason emo was misdrawn and misdirected to Kalyaninagar post office   and after ascertaining non payment of the said emo O.P 2 has issued order for duplicate MO vide letter web complain  No.75400005407 dt.01.10.2015 which has been already paid to payee on 07.10.2015.

                  Section 48 of the I.P.P Acat,1898 provides that the Opp.Party was not liable for any delay or loss during transit. The amount of money order was  delivered  after seven months because the emo was wrongly noted. The provisions of Section 48 of the Indian Post and Telegraph Act are relevant for the purpose of action to be taken against the concerned employee who wrongly mentioned the address and not the consumer  and that is why Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 provides an independent and additional remedy to the consumer than any law for the time being in force. Criteria for determining deficiency in service is altogether different that the liability under Section 48 of the I.P.O Act. Any king of fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a  contract or otherwise in relation to any service amounts to deficiency in service and entitles the consumer to an amount of compensation as the loss or injury suffered by him due to negligence of the opposite party.

                  However, looking to the amount of money order and the delay of seven months for payment thereto, we partly allow the complaint  by awarding Rs.1000/- as compensation which shall include the cost of litigation. Hence, it is ordered.

 

                                                                   ORDER

 

                        Hence, we ordered   the O.Ps  to pay  amount of 1000/- as compensation amount for the delay in delivery of the money order and for the harassment undergone by the complainant which include the cost of  litigation.

                                    Pronounced in  open forum today on this 22^nd  day of December,2015         under   the seal and signature of this forum.

                                    A Copy of  this orders  as per the statutory    requirements, be supplied      to the             parties  free of charge.

 

                                   

                                    Member                                                                       President

           

 

           

           

Documents relied upon:

            By the complainant:

1. Xerox copy of  courier service
2.  Xerox copy of letter to the O.p
3. Xerox copy of Postal acknowledgement

 By the O.Ps :

1. Copy of EMO form
2. Web report
3. Letter issued by O.P2 for duplicate MO
4. Letter of SPM Avinaba Bidanasi Cuttack.

                                                                                                               President