C.F. CASE No. : CC/11/78
COMPLAINANT : Dr. Amulya Mandal
B-6/119, Kalyani, Nadia
OPPOSITE PARTIES/OPs: 1) The Post Master,
Kalyani Head Post Office,
Kalyani, Dist. Nadia
2) The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Nadia South Division, Kalyani
Dist. Nadia
3) The Chief Post Master General,
Yogayog Bhawan, Kolkata - 700012
PRESENT : SHRI KANAILAL CHAKRABORTY PRESIDENT
: SHRI SHYAMLAL SUKUL MEMBER
DATE OF DELIVERY
OF JUDGMENT : 27th February, 2012
: J U D G M E N T :
In brief, the case of the complainant is that he sent a registered letter with postal charge of Rs. 500/- to his brother one Ganesh Chandra Mandal at Houston, Texas, USA on 18.11.08 from Kalyani Head Post Office, Nadia. It is his further case that the said letter contained seven closed office envelopes addressed to different Medical Colleges of USA containing admission application forms and photocopies of certificates of his son for admission. Those certificates were issued by different professors of medical colleges of USA. The addressee, Ganesh Chandra Mandal received the envelope (registered letter) in USA on 04.12.08 in a damaged condition without having any of the contents of the letters in the envelope. The USA postal department delivered the said letter to the addressee with a mark on the letter cover ‘received damaged, received without contents’ dtd. 04.12.08. Thereafter, he made a complaint to the Superintendent of Post Offices, South Division, Kalyani, Nadia and the Chief Post Master General, Kolkata. After lapse of long period the Department of Post, Kolkata Airport Sorting Division sent a letter to him on 09.10.09 / 17.11.09 asking for supply of photocopy of empty damaged cover of the letter. In reply to that he sent the said photocopy of the damaged cover on 22.01.10 and 13.11.10, but no further communication was done by the postal authority with him. Due to this negligent act of the OPs, his son lost the opportunity of getting chance of admission in USA. So having no other alternative he has filed this case praying for the reliefs as stated in the petition of complaint.
Written version is filed by the OP, Post Office in this case, inter alia, stating that the case is not maintainable in its present form and nature. It is his contention that the petitioner booked a registered letter bearing No. 6219, dtd. 18.11.08 at Kalyani Head Post Office, which was duly disbursed to Sealdah RMS on the same date and as such there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Kalyani Head Post Office. Thereafter, the said registered letter was forwarded by Sealdah RMS to the foreign post for onward transmission to the office to the destination. Practically there is no fraudulent or wilful act on the part of the OPs. Besides this, as per Section 6, of Indian Post Office Act, 1898, the OPs have got no liability for any loss, mis-delivery or damage of any article. Moreover the number of articles has not been mentioned by the complainant. Practically, the Post Office has not got any knowledge of the contents of the letter though the same was a covered envelope. No report of damage has been received at any time from the foreign post of India as well as USA after delivery of the said registered letter to the addressee. Besides this, as per provision the record in respect of registered letter is to be preserved for only one year and as such the concerned file is not traceable as the letter was registered in 2008. So the petitioner has no cause of action to file this case and the same is liable to be dismissed with cost.
POINTS FOR DECISION
Point No.1: Has the complainant any cause of action to file this case?
Point No.2: Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Both the points are taken up together for discussion as they are interrelated and for the sake of convenience.
On a careful perusal of the petition of complaint along with the annexed documents and the written version filed by the OPs and also after hearing the arguments advanced by the parties it is available on record that that admittedly the complainant sent a registered letter on 18.11.08 from Kalyani Head Post Office to his brother one Ganesh Chandra Mandal at Houston, Texas, USA. It is also available on record that the said registered letter was received by the addressee Ganesh Chandra Mandal on 04.12.08. It is the complainant’s specific allegation that in the registered letter he sent six documents regarding to his son to his brother in the registered envelope, but the said envelope was received by the addressee with the postal seal of USA as “Received damage, and received without content.” So he has claimed for damage as it was caused due to negligence of the Indian Postal Authority. Now the question is whether it is proved regarding the negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the postal authority. From the documents filed by the complainant and going through the pleadings of both the parties it is available on record that Kalyani Head Post Office sent the registered letter on the selfsame date to Sealdah RMS for onward transmission to the office of the destination and practically the said letter reached the destination on 04.12.08 on which date it was delivered to the addressee. OP has relied upon Section – 6, of the Indian Postal Act, 1898 which speaks that “The Government shall not incur any liability by reason of the loss, misdelivery or delay of, or damage to, any postal article in course of transmission by post, except in so far as such liability may in express terms be undertaken by the Central Government as hereinafter provided; and no officer of the Post Office shall incur any liability by reason of any such loss, misdelivery, delay or damage, unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his willful act or default.”
Here in the present case, it is available on record that the registered letter dtd. 18.11.08 was duly sent by the OP No. 1 to Sealdah RMS for onward transmission to USA, on the selfsame date and Sealdaha RMS duly sent the said registered letter as a result of which the addressee received the letter in USA on 04.12.08. So we don’t find any negligence or fraudulent act on the part of the OPs in sending the letter to the addressee in USA. From the documents filed by the complainant it is available that the addressee received the said letter in damaged condition having no content in that letter also. Complainant has not filed any document to show that the alleged documents were sent in the registered letter nor, it is established that the registered envelope was damaged by the OPs. He has not made any specific allegation against any postal officer for negligent or fraudulent act. Rather at ‘Para-12’ he has categorically stated that the cause of mental agony is a definite case of deficiency of postal service.
On the side of the OP, a ruling is cited from II (2011) CPJ, page – 09, NC where the Hon’ble National Commission decided that, “Indian Post Office Act, 1898 – Section 6 – Non-delivery of registered letters – Section 6 grants complete immunity to Government for loss, misdelivery or damage to postal articles – No allegation has been made against any officer of postal department that loss or damage caused due to fraudulent or wilful act or default of such an officer – No relief can be granted against any of officers of department.” The Hon’ble National Commission has also decided that, “By posting a letter or handing over a packet at the post office for transmission to the address of the addressee, the sender does not enter into any contract with the government. The sender really avails of a service statutorily provided by the Government. It is true that postage stamps have to be affixed but that is for augmentation of Government revenue. It is not in the nature of a price paid for the service.” It is further observed by the Hon’ble National Commission that “As the Supreme Court has pointed out the Post Office is not a common carrier, it is not an agent of the sender for sending of the postal articles to the addressee. It is really a branch of the public service subject to the provisions of the Indian Post Office Act and the rules made thereunder.”
On a careful perusal of the above cited ruling, we hold that it is applicable to the present case also. In view of this judgment, we further hold that the postal authority gets an immunity from any liability as granted under Section 6 of the Post Office Act, 1898. Besides this, it is already discussed that no specific allegation is made by the complainant against any particular officer of the post office regarding his fraudulent or negligent act.
In view of the above discussions and considering the facts of this case our considered view is that the complainant has not become able to prove his case. So he is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for. In result the case fails.
Hence,
Ordered,
That the case, CC/11/78 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OPs without any cost.
Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.
