Haryana

StateCommission

A/111/2016

INDIAN POSTAL DEPATT. - Complainant(s)

Versus

YOGESH KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

NAMIT KUMAR

22 Aug 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                             

                                                         First Appeal No.111 of 2016

Date of Institution:-05.02.2016

                                                           Date of Decision: 22.08.2016

 

The Superintendent, Indian Postal Department, Head Post Master, Nehru Ground, Near B.K.Chowk, NIT, Faridabad.

…..Appellant

Versus

 

Yogesh Kumar aged about 32 years S/o Sh.Braham Dutt Sharma, R/o H.NO.KC-352, Ward NO.4, Krishna Colony, Palwal, Haryana.

                                                …..Respondent

 

CORAM:                    Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.

                                    Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.                                                                                                                                                                          

Present:                     Shri  R.P.Singh, Advocate counsel for appellant.

                                    Shri Yogesh Kumar respondent in person.

 

                                                               O R D E R

URVASHI AGNIHOTRI, MEMBER:

 

1. The Superintendent, Indian Postal Department – OP is in appeal against the Order dated 31.12.2015 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad (for short ‘District Forum’), whereby the complaint of Yogesh Kumar -    Complainant has been disposed of with the following directions: -

“10.     Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.9760/- in lieu of amount spent on booking of said package tour and Rs.2200/- on account of mental tension as well as harassment besides Rs.1100/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant within 30 days from the receipt of the copy of this order”.

2. In brief, the complainant being a member of Niswiz Holidays Company vide membership No.NW42258/38N3S sent a Holidays Platter for holiday package for Agra vide Speed Post No.EH565828024IN on 24.12.2014 at 13:46 through branch Sector-12, Mini Sectt. Faridabad office of OP by paying Rs.39/- The said letter was to be delivered at its destination within 24 hours to 48 hours but the same was delivered at its destination on 06.01.2015. Due to delay of delivery, the said tour package was not sanctioned by the company as per the terms and conditions and due to the negligence of the OP, the complainant could not enjoy said tour package as well as suffered financial loss of Rs.10,000/- as paid by the complainant to the company. The complainant served a legal notice to the OP by registered post on 05.01.2015, but did not receive any reply. Aggrieved against this, the complainant approached the District Forum claiming an amount of Rs.10,000/- on account of package charge paid to the company and Rs.20,000/- spent on shopping by the complainant as well as Rs.50,000/- on account of mental tension, harassment and agony besides Rs.11,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant.
3. In reply, the OPs admitted that the said article was booked from Faridabad, Sector-12, Post office on 24.12.2014 for dispatch to destination to Manimajra at Chandigarh. The same was delivered to the addressee on 07.01.2015. They further stated that the reply to the legal notice was duly sent vide office letter No.CR/legal notice dated 04.02.2015 at Faridabad.  Thus, there was no deficiency in service on their part. However, the plea of the OPs was rejected and the learned District Forum allowed the complaint on 31.12.2015 by granting the aforesaid relief.  
4. Against the impugned order, the OP / appellant have filed appeal before us reiterating their pleas as raised before the District Forum. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
5. In fact, the law relating to dispatch of articles through the agency of post offices, there late delivery and loss in transit and compensation payable therefore, is more than 100 years old. The numerous cases have been dealt under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 i.e. last 30 years. Consistent view of the Hon’ble National Consumer Commission and the State Commissions in the country had been to award on nominal compensation as permissible under the Post Office Act and Rules made there under, and not as claimed by the Consumers in their claim petitions. One such case decided by the Hon’ble National Commission is Union of India and others versus M.L. Bora, 2011 CTJ 27 (CP) (NCDRC), wherein the Hon’ble National Commission has observed as under:-

“7.        Section 6 is in two parts. The first part deals with the liability of government and the second part deals with the individual liability of the postal employee. The first part of Section 6 absolves the Government of any liability by reason of loss, mis delivery of delay or damage to any postal article in the course of transmission by post except in so far as such liability may in express terms undertaken by the Central Government as provided by the statue. Second part provides that no office of the Post Office shall incur any liability by reason of such loss, misdelivery, delay or damage unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his willful act or default”.  Since, in the instant case, the complaint has been made against the Postal Authorities in general and there is no allegation of any fraud or willful act or default on the part of the any one of the respondents, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

6. In view of the law settled by the Hon’ble National Commission, the appeal of the Postal Authorities deserves to be allowed and the complaint is hereby disposed of with a direction to the OPs to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.500/- in lumpsum compensation in addition to Rs.78/- as sanctioned by the OP.  
7. The statutory amount of Rs.6530/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules.

 

 

August 12^th, 2016                       Urvashi Agnihotri                                   R.K.Bishnoi,                                                     Member                                                Judicial Member                                                Addl. Bench                                          Addl.Bench

S.K.