BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN

 06^th OCTOBER 2015

O R D E R

SRI. P.V SINGRI, PRESIDENT

The complainants have filed this complaint U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Party (herein after referred as OP) for compensation and litigation cost in all amounting to Rs.60,000/- for the deficiency in service.

2. The brief averments made in the complaint are as under:

The complainants on 28^th August 2014 received two parcels from Mr.Tariq sent from Indiranagar PO Lucknow.  The said parcels were numbered as ACU068572797IN and ACU068573015IN weighed 3200 and 3800 gms respectively.  That on receiving the packages, the outside cloth was intact, however on opening the package several items were found missing.  It was evident that the plastic and paper boxes were cut open and some of the items were taken out and stolen and outer cloth bag was restitched.  It was also noticed that the weight of the received packages was only 1870 gms.  The complainant immediately lodged a formal complaint with the Sub Post Master PO 560070.  The complainants also sent a further letter to the Senior Superintendent of Post office, Jayanagar 4^th Block on 15.09.2014 seeking compensation of Rs.60,000/- towards cost of the items lost and for the inconvenience/distress caused.  That most expensive items have been stolen from the parcel.  That the said items are very rare pieces which the complainants had purchased for their personal consumption and they will not be able to get the said items again.

For the aforesaid reasons, the complainants pray for an order directing the OP to pay them a compensation of Rs.40,000/- towards the cost of the items stolen/lost and incidental cost, legal expenses of Rs.10,000/- to each one of them.

3. The OP in response to the notice issued, appeared through their advocate and filed their version denying the allegations made against them and further contended as under:

That it is true that the complainants were delivered two parcels on 28^th August 2014 which weighing 3200 and 3800 gms.  However, it is false to state that the said parcels were tampered with and certain items in the said parcels were stolen.  The complainants did not raise any objections at the time of taking delivery of the said parcels.  That at the time of delivery, the outer condition of the said parcels was intact and delivered properly to the addressee.  That the complainants have lodged a complaint after receiving the parcels, without raising any objections.  There is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP and they are not liable to pay any compensation as claimed by the complainants.

The complaint filed by the complainants was investigated and it was found that the parcels in question were not tampered with at any place from the place of booking till they are delivered to the complainants.  The sender of the parcels had neither insured nor declared the contents of the parcels along with value of the contents at the time of booking as required under clause 184 of Post Office Guide part-1.  That the responsibility of the post office is absolved for the payment of compensation as per the Post Office Guide part-1 clause 182 when there is no visible damage to the parcel from the booking office to delivery end.  Therefore, the OP is not liable to pay any compensation to the complainants and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4. To substantiate the allegations made in the complaint, the complainant-1 Smt.Shobana filed her affidavit by way of evidence.  The OP also filed the affidavit evidence of Senior Superintendent of Post Office, Bangalore South Division, Bangalore in support of the averments made in the version.  Both the parties have submitted their written submission.

5. On the rival contention of both the parties, the points that arise for our determination in this case are as under:

        6. Perused the material placed on record including the allegations made in the complaint, the averments made in the version, written submissions and the various documents relied upon by the parties.  Also heard the oral arguments submitted by the complainants.  The OP failed to submit their oral arguments.

7. Our answer to the above issues are as under:

REASONS

8.  It is not in dispute that on 28.08.2014 the complainants were delivered two parcels bearing No.ACU068572797IN and ACU068573015IN sent to them by one Mr.Tariq from Indiranagar Post, Lucknow in U.P.  As mentioned over the parcels they weighed 3200 & 3800 grams respectively.  The complainants claimed that at the time of receiving the said parcels from the postman both the parcels appeared intact as both were stitched with cloths and on opening they found that several expensive items were missing from the parcels.  Therefore, the complainant claims that they immediately lodged formal complaint to the concerned Post Office.

9. The complainants submitted that both the parcels contained expensive and rare sarees and after having purchased the sarees the same were sent to above said Mr.Tariq for embroidery work and after the embroidery work they were sent to them through the above said two parcels.  The complainants have produced along with complaint the various receipts under which they had purchased the said sarees.  The complainants have also produced the colour photographs of the said sarees taken by them at the time of sending the same to the above said Mr.Tariq.  The complainants have prepared a list of the items lost/stolen during the transit.  According to which totally 15 items have been lost/stolen during transit and the total value of the said items comes to Rs.38,225/-.

10. The contention of the OP is that the complainants received the parcels without any objections.  The complainants submitted that since both the parcels appeared to be intact and stitched, they received the parcels without any objections and only after opening the parcels they found that the expensive articles in the parcels were stolen and in their place some trash was pushed inside and thereafter the cloth was stitched carefully to make it appear the parcels were not tampered with.  From the submission made by the complainants and from the various documents produced by them it is evident that the valuable items have been stolen from the parcels by cutting open the parcel box and thereafter the cloth has been carefully stitched to make it appear that the parcels are intact.  It appears that since the parcels appeared intact the complainants received the same from the concerned Post Master without raising any objections.

11. Merely because the complainants have received the parcels without raising any objections does not mean that there was no theft of articles from the said parcels.  We do not find any oblique motive in the allegations made by the complainants.  It is not that the complainants have sent the sarees to Lucknow for the first time.  In the past they have sent the sarees to Lucknow several times and received them safely.  For the first time they have come across the theft of expensive sarees from the parcel.  Therefore, we do not feel that the complainants are making false allegations against the OP for any wrongful gain.

12. The OP in their version as well as in the affidavit filed by way of evidence took up a contention that the said parcels were neither insured by the sender nor the description of the contents and their value were declared at the time of booking.  Therefore, it cannot be believed that the said parcels contained any expensive items as claimed by the complainants.  As already stated the complainants have absolutely no reasons to make false allegations against the OP.

13. The OP further contended that they are absolved from paying any compensation to the complainants as per clause-182 of Post Office Guide Part-1 since no visible damage to the parcels was found from booking office to delivery office.  Therefore, it is contended by the OP that they are not liable to pay any compensation in view of the provisions contained in clause-182 and 184 of Post Office Guide part-1.  Though it is stated in the version that the relevant copy of the clause-182 & 184 of Post Office Guide part-1 has been produced along with the version but no such copy of the Post Office Guide part-1 is produced.  Even at the time when the Learned Advocate for OP filed their written arguments he was asked to provide the copy of the Post Office Guide part-1 for perusal.  However on the date when the case was set down for arguments, the OP neither kept himself present nor produced the copy of the Post Office Guide part-1 to enable us to ascertain as to what caluse-182 & 184 provides for.  The said Post Office Guide part-1 is also not available in the Library of this Forum.  Therefore, we are not able to go through the provisions contained in clause-182 & 184 of Post Office Guide part-1.  Without the copy of the said provisions before us we are unable to come to the conclusion that OP is absolved from paying any compensation etc., to the complainants.

14. As stated above, the complainants by producing the relevant documents have successfully established that the above mentioned two parcels, which they received were tampered with and the expensive sarees amounting to nearly Rs.40,000/- were stolen during the transit.  We do not have any reasons to suspect the bonafides of the complainants in approaching this Forum for compensation.  Moreover the complainants in the affidavit evidence have made it very clear that they have not filed the present complaint with any oblique motive or to make any wrongful gain to themselves and they are willing to donate all the moneys received as compensation, to a charity named by this Forum.  This submission of the complainants makes abundantly clear that the complainants filed the complaint not to make any wrongful gain to themselves but to send the message to the OP to improve their system and services in future for the benefit everyone using their services.

15. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the complainants are entitled to the cost of the items lost amounting to Rs.38,225/- together with compensation of Rs.5,000/- each for the deficiency in service on the part of the OP together with litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-.

16. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:   

  O R D E R

The complaint filed by the complainants U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is allowed in part.  OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.38,225/- to the complainant towards the cost of the items stolen/lost and compensation of Rs.5,000/- to each of the complainants for the inconvenience and mental agony undergone by them for the deficiency in service on their part together with litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-.

The OP shall comply the order passed by this Forum within six weeks from today.

Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Forum on this 06^th day of October 2015)

MEMBER                            MEMBER                    PRESIDENT

Vln* 

Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainants dated 09.04.2015.

1. Shobhana Krishnaswamy

Documents produced by the complainant:

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite party dated 14.07.2015.

1. Sri.H.R Veerana Goud

Documents produced by OP - Nil

MEMBER                             MEMBER                      PRESIDENT

Vln*