SMT. RAVI SUSHA: PRESIDENT

Complainant has filed this complaint for getting an order directing opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to complainant towards compensation with 12% interest together with cost of the complaint.

            Case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is a consultant periodontist, Multi Specialty Dental Clinic, Payyannur.  Complainant is an active worker of Indian Society of Periodontology for the last several yeas.  He is a life member of the said society since 1997.  He was also one among the members of National Executing committee for the years 2001-2021.  He had served as National vice president for the year for the years 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2008-2009 and 2010-2011 hold the post of National Treasurer in the year 2009-2010 and as National President for the year 2012-2013.  The election of the officer bearers for the year 2021-2022 had been notified as usual and the complainant sent his nomination from the election of Indian Society of Periodontology by speed post bearing article No. EL. 575485054 IL on 23/07/2021 addressed to the office of such society at Delhi.  The complainant submits that he had verified its tracking records and from the tracking records he could see that the article (Letter) was noted received at Tagore Garden So on 26^th July 2021 and delivery was recorded on 4^th August 2021.  But on enquiry complainant could learn that the delivery of the article was affected only on 10^th August 2021.  Complainant could further understand by checking tracking records that the article was hold on due to ‘door locked’ from 26^th July 2021 to 2^nd August 2021.  But the same time an article bearing No. EL 647927893IL sent by his friend Dr. C K Asokan on 23/07/2021 was seen delivered on 26^th July 2021 and another speed post sent by his another friend Dr. Dayakar M M was seen delivered on 30^th July 2021.  The complainant firmly believes that the postman who deputed to serve the article had played a foul play in this regard and it amounts to the deficiency of service on the part of postal department.  By the act of said postman, the complainant had sustained a huge loss. In fact, the complainant wanted to submit his nomination on or before 7^th August 2021 and he had sent his article containing nomination well before the due date.  But it was delivered after the due date to the reasons stated above.  The complainant strongly believes that the concerned postman in colluding with the addressee/office bearers of Indian society of Periodontology has kept the article hold on till the date on which the validity of nomination become invalid.  The complainant felt much mental pain and agony by losing his chance of participating in the election of office bearers in an esteemed society.  Further he expects a reasonable chance of success in the proposed election.  Due to the non acceptance of his nomination, his reputation is also is badly affected among his friends and colleagues.  The loss sustained to him can’t be compensated in terms of money.   But he estimate his damage  to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for the defecting and insufficient service rendered by the postal department towards the loss, mental pain and agony suffered by him.  Stating these facts, the complainant caused to issue a lawyer notice dated 13/12/2021  to the OPs in which the complainant demanded to compensation him to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-.  OPs separately send a letter acknowledging the above said lawyer notice.  Moreover OP NO.3, send a reply admitting that there is some lapses on the part of OP No.1.  Hence this complaint.

            OPs filed version.  They denied the charge of deficiency of service on the part of OPs.  They submitted that

It is admitted that the speed post article sent by the complainant from Payyannur Sub Post Office on 23/07/2021 was received in Tagore Garden Post Office, New Delhi-110027 on 26/07/2021.  Delivery was attempted on the same day, but on the verbal request of the addressee ie Dr. Harpreet Singh Grover, r/o J-9/48, and 2nd floor Rajouri Garden.  New Delhi -110027  it was kept on hold and finally delivered on 10/08/2021.  This fact was also confirmed from the addressee by the Public Relation Inspector PRI (P), Tagore Garden Post Office, New Delh-110027 during the inquiry conducted on receipt of complaint from Sh. Santosh Sreedhar.  The PRI(P) had also visited to the addressee to obtain his version.  The complainant was suitably replied in this regard by e-mail dated 29/11/2021.  Further submitted that the speed post article was kept on hold on the request of the recipient, therefore there is no irregularity in this regard.  The allegation of the complaint against the delivery postman regarding foul play and deficiency in service is totally concreted and imaginary as the speed post article was kept on hold on the request of the addressee, there is no question arise of lack of service on the part of postman.  As per Sec.6 of the Post Office Act 1896, along with Rule 170 it is evident that only an       ex-gratia amount can be paid by the head of the circle in the  case of the loss of a parcel and no compensation based upon the value of the parcel is payable unless the parcel is duly insured.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of Tagore Garden Post Office, New Delhi(OP1).  Further it is submitted that the complainant is not eligible to get any compensation.  Claiming of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation is totally baseless.  Hence prayed for the dismissal of complaint.

            In order to prove the allegations in the complaint, complainant has filed his proof affidavit and got the documents marked as Exts.A1 to A21.  OPs have not adduced oral or documentary evidence.  After that the learned counsel of complainant has filed written argument note.  OP has also filed written argument note.

            In this case, the nomination letter for the election of the Indian Society of periodontology for the Year 2021-2022, was sent by the complainant by speed post on 23/07/2021 to office of such society at Delhi.  It was admitted by OP in the written version that the article was sent on 23/07/2021 but delivered to the addressee on 10/08/2021.  Complainant has stated that the last date of receipt of nomination letter is on 07/08/2021.  Complainant alleged that though he had sent the nomination letter well before the due date ie on 23/07/2021, and it was reached at the post office of the addressee on 26/07/2021, and the delivery was recorded on 04/08/2021, but it was confirmed only on 10/08/2021.  So his nomination became invalid.   Complainant alleged that on enquiry he could understand that though the article reached at the addressee’s post office on 26/07/2021, it was hold on due to ‘door locked’ from 26/07/2021 to 02/08/2021 and the delivery was recorded on 04/08/2021.  But it was confirmed only on 10/08/2021.  Complainant pleaded that at the same time the nomination sent by ;his friend Dr.  C K Asokan on the same day 23/07/2021 was seen delivered on 26/07/2021 and another speed post sent by his another friend        Dr. Dayakar M M was seen delivered on 30/07/2021.  Complainant alleged the concerned postman in colluding with the addressee had kept the article of complainant hold on till the date on which the validity of nomination became invalid.

            Complainant   submitted that he is an active worker of Indian society of periodonology for the last several years.  He is a life member of the said society since 1997.  He was also one among the members of National
Executing committee for the years 2001-2021.  He had served as National vice president for the year for the years 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2008-2009 and 2010-2011 held the post of National Treasurer in the year 2009-2010 and as National President for the year       2012-2013.  Complainant further submitted that he felt much mental pain and agony by losing his chance of participating in the election of office bearers in an esteemed society.  Further he expects a reasonable chance of success in the proposed election.  Due to the non-acceptance of his nomination, his reputation is also badly affected among his friends and colleagues.   Complainant further submitted that if OP informed to the complainant about the refusal of receiving the nomination by the addressee, he could have delivered the nomination directly to the addressee.  Instead of informing or returning the article in time, hold it due to the reasons ‘door locked’ until expiry of the last date of receipt of nomination amounts to the deficiency of service on the part of postal department.

            Here OPs raised a contention that under section 6 of 1898 Act, OP incurs no liability for loss, damage in delivery.  Our view is that in this case the said provision is not in any way connected with delay in delivery of article entrusted to them for delivery.  Further this provision is not in any way connected with the modernized forms of transactions like speed post, e-mail, money transfer etc.  So in this case OPs will not get the privileges of Sec.6 of the Act. With regard to the next contention raised by the OP, as per Rule 170, the compensation shall not exceed the actual amount of the loss or damage and the amount can be referred directly to some loss or damage.

            This rule does not come in any way in this case.  Here there is delay in delivery of speed post article beyond the time determined by the department of post.  In this case OP failed to prove their contentions through their own evidence.  None of the OPs not tendered evidence either orally or documentary.

            Hence in the circumstances of this case, delay in delivery of the communication, though sent by speed post, becomes the cause for the refusal of the nomination of the complainant by the office bearers of election committee and could not contest from the election of Indian society of periodotonlogy.  Therefore we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs and are liable to compensate the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant.

            In the result complaint is allowed in part.  Opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation of the mental agony and hardship and cost of the proceedings of this case.  Opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount within one month from the date of receipt of this order.  Failing which the amount Rs.1,00,000/- carries interest @ 7% per annum from the date of order till realization.  Complainant is at liberty to file execution application under the provision of Consumer Protection Act 2019 for realization of awarded amount.

Exts.

A1-Letter issued by Indian society of periodontology dated 30/08/2021

A2-Complainant issued by complaint  dated 20/10/2021

A3- E-mail dated 30/09/2021

A4- 4^th OP issued reply to complainant dated 30/09/2021

A5-Postal track record dated 23/07/2021

A6-Postal track dated 23/07/2021(Dr.Dayakar M M)

A7-Postal track letter issued by Dr.C K Asokan

A8-Letter issued by OP2  dated 04/10/2021

A9-Lawyer notice

A10-Postal receipt of OP No.1

A11-Postal receipt of OP No.2

A12-Postal receipt of OP No.3

A13-Postal receipt of OP No.4

A14-Acknowledgment card OP No.1

A15-Acknowledgment card OP No.2

A16-Acknowledgment card OP No.3

A17-Acknowledgment card OP No.4

A18-Letter issued by OP No.2

A19-Reply notice

A20-Election notification

A21-E-mail sent by OP1 to complainant

Pw1-Complainant

     Sd/                                                                                     Sd/                                                         Sd/

PRESIDENT                                                                   MEMBER                                              MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                                               Molykutty Mathew                                     Sajeesh K.P

(mnp)

/Forward by order/

Assistant Registrar