BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.49 of 2017

Date of Instt. 20.02.2016

Date of Decision: 04.10.2017

Dr. Nakul Kundra, Resident of- C/o Kundra Department Store, NC-118, Kot Kishan Chand, Jalandhar City, Punjab.

.........Complainant

Versus

The Department of Posts, Govt. of India, India, Through The Post Master, GPO, Jalandhar.

….…Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Sh. Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Complainant in person.

Sh. GPS Rana, Adv Counsel for the OP.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint filed by the complainant, wherein stated that the complainant is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act and further stated that the OP is the Department of Posts, Govt. of India, which is to be represented by Post Master, GPO, Jalandhar. The primary function of the department of posts is collection, processing, transmission and delivery of mail. According to the department, Express Parcel is an air express parcel product, providing time bound delivery of parcels. These parcel will be transmitted through air or any other fastest mean available. The delivery norm for the Express Parcel Service is to be followed by the department of Post Office. The complainant was to go to Hyderabad by air for PGCTE programme that was scheduled to be held from 21.06.2016 to 19.07.2016. The complainant reserved his flight tickets on 27.03.2016. Since the complainant have physically disability, it was difficult for him to carry and manage any books and other important things during travel and accordingly he decided to send his luggage by Express Parcel to one of his friends, who was doing PhD from EFLU, Hyderabad. The complainant sent the Express Parcel No.CP101867877IN on 14.06.2016. This very important parcel was sent from GPO, Jalandhar to JAMA I OSMANIA S.O-500007. The weight of this parcel was 15 Kgs and 980 grams and complainant paid Rs.859/- for this Express Parcel Service. The parcel was supposed to be delivered before his arrival in Hyderabad i.e. 20 June 2016. When the status of the parcel was not updated online after 15 June, 2016, complainant registered an online complaint No.10007014438. When complainant reached Hyderabad, he was without any luggage. Despite his various mails and urgent requests, he did not get satisfactory response from the department of Posts though he had emphasized the urgent need of the parcel in his requests and mails. Then, he had to approach the higher authorities of the department of posts on Social Websites to get his parcel traced. The express parcel was delivered to him on 09.07.2016. The Postal Department took 25 days to deliver his Express parcel and did not fulfill its commitment of 'time bound delivery'. The parcel contained important books, assignments and some very important daily use items, which he urgently needed during the PGCTE Contact Programme in Hyderabad from 21.06.2016 to 19.07.2016. His PGCTE exams were to be started from 13.07.2016 and he received the parcel just four days before his exams. From 21.06.2016 to 09.07.2016, he could not study well and had hard time in Hyderabad. He had really work hard for the course, it was difficult for him to do justice with the programme without his notes and books. He could not get the desired grade. He was really very disappointed because he is very sincere student. He suffered emotionally, psychologically and academically due to the delay in delivering the parcel. His complaint was closed on 12.08.2016, without any intimation and without any substantial action. Through his RTI application, the complainant came to know that the complaint was closed by 'Auto Closure Mode', then complainant again sent an email on 25.08.2016 to the Post Master, Jalandhar for looking into the matter seriously but he neither been responded nor given any compensation so far. Besides, he has not been informed about the reason for this delay. This shows the indifferent and unprofessional attitude of the Department of Posts and further he was became aware through RTI application that there is no ruling or provision for paying a compensation in case of delay of express parcel and as such, the instant complaint was filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and also refund the charges paid for express parcel i.e. Rs.859/- and also pay the litigation cost.

2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP and accordingly OP appeared through his counsel and filed reply and admitted Para No.1 to 3 but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly prayed that the complaint of the complainant is without merit and the same may be dismissed.

3. In order to prove his case, complainant himself tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8 and closed the evidence.

4. Similarly, the counsel for the OP tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit Ex.OP-A and then closed the evidence.

5. We have heard the complainant in person as well as the learned counsel for the OP and also gone through the case file very minutely.

6. After considering the over all circumstances, we came to conclusion that the complainant sent an express parcel No.CP101867877IN on 14.06.2016 from Jalandhar to Hyderabad, after making a payment of the services charge of Rs.859/- and it was accepted date for delivery of the said parcel in Hyderabad was on or before 20.06.2016, but unfortunately, the said express parcel was delivered on 09.07.2016, after a delay of about 25 days. Infact, the complainant had to go to Hyderabad by Air for PGCTE programme that was scheduled to be held from 21.06.2016 to 19.07.2016 and he being a physically disability could not able to manage his books and other important things during travel and due to that reason, he decided to send his luggage by Express Parcel at the address of his one friend, who was doing PHD in Hyderabad but the OP has not provided an agreed services and as such, there is a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.

7. The above facts has not been denied by the OP in its written reply, rather the OP admitted in para No.5.3 that the OP tried to search online the auto updation about the article of the complainant but could not able to locate the status of the said article and ultimately, the article was delivered as window delivery on 08.07.2016. So, delay is itself admitted by the OP in its reply and it is also admitted by the OP that the complainant filed two complaints for locating the status of the parcel as well as for making a payment of the compensation, but no appropriate relief has been given to the complainant by the OP, the complaints of the complainant are available on the file Ex.C4, Ex.C5 and reply of the same given by the OP is Ex.C6. There is an other complaint of the complainant is Ex.C8 but no compensation was awarded to the complainant by the OP, despite receiving three complaints and further it is also established that there is an about 25 days delay for delivery of the parcel, whereby the complainant suffered physically, emotionally, psychologically and academically due to non delivery of his books and other articles and as such, the OP is liable to compensate the complainant and accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OP is directed to refund the charges paid for express parcel i.e. Rs.859/- to the complainant alongwith compensation for mentally and physically harassment to the complainant to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and further directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. Complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

8. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Karnail Singh

04.10.2017 Member President