(Passed on 13/07/2016)

Per Mr. B.A. Shaikh, Hon’ble Presiding Member

1. This appeal is filed by original complainant against the order dated 20/10/2003 passed by the District Forum, Amravati in consumer complaint bearing NO. 121/2002 by  which direction has been given to the opposite party (for short OP) Nos. 1 and 2 to pay jointly and severely compensation of Rs. 10,000/- towards the loss sustained by the complainant/appellant due to not delivery of his application within time as  sent under envelope through OP Nos. 1 and 2 to Homeopathy Medical College, Hyderabad  and also to pay him cost of Rs. 250/-. The Forum also directed that  if  said amounts are not paid  within 30 days of receipt of that order,  then complainant will be entitled to recover the same with interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum.
2. The learned advocate of both the parties filed written notes of arguments. Advocate Mr. Kasture informed this Commission on behalf of advocate Mr. Kalantri, who represents the appellant that the written notes of arguments filed by advocate Mr. Kalantri may be treated as his oral arguments. Moreover advocate Mr. Shekhani holding for advocate Mr. Agrawal is present for respondent and he also made  a submission that written notes of arguments filed by respondent’s advocate may be treated as his oral arguments. He also relied on Section 6 of Indian Post Office Act, 1898. In support of his submission that the postal authority is exempted from liability due to loss caused on account of late delivery of postal article.
3. The learned proxy advocate of the respondent also submitted  that the respondents have already complied with the impugned order. Hence we find that there is no question of consideration  of Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1988.
4. Admittedly, the postal article was sent by Speed Post by the appellant through respondent. It was not reached within the given time to the addressee and therefore the addressee of the envelope refused to accept it. It is the case of the respondent that as his application for admission sent under that envelope was not delivered within given time, he could not get admission in the desired  college. However there is no evidence to show as to what loss he has sustained due to non-delivery of Postal article within time. The appellant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. In our view  in the absence of any evidence about the loss sustained by the appellant, the Forum has rightly assessed the compensation of Rs. 10,000/-
5. It is seen that the appellant relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble National Commission in the case of Head Post Master, Head Post Office Vs. Neeraj Gupta (II) 2013 CPJ 732 (NC) in which the finding of the Forum about grant  of compensation for Rs. 20,000/- was upheld as awaited for delay in delivery of speed post article.
6. In our view as in the instant case, there is not document to show the actual loss sustained by the appellant, aforesaid decision relied upon by learned advocate of the appellant is not applicable to the present case.
7. We thus, hold that appellant is not entitled to enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Forum. There is no merits in the appeal and hence it deserves to be dismissed.

ORDER

1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. No order as to cost in appeal.
3. Copy of order be furnished to both the parties, free of cost.