INDIAN POSTAL DEPARTMENT vs Omkar Singh

THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 10.8.2001 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called the ''District Forum'' for short) in Complaint Case No. 190/2001 whereby the District Forum had allowed the complaint.

THE facts not presently in dispute are that on 16.11.1998 the complainant/respondent had booked a parcel with the opposite party No. 2 to be sent to Shri Ram Bahadur Singh, Village and Post Daulatpur, District Balia, Pin-221 713. THE appellant had paid Rs. 104/- towards charges for sending the parcel and consequently the opposite party No. 2 had issued receipt No. 4016 in favour of the complainant. It is also not in dispute that Sri Ram Bahadur Singh refused to accept the said parcel as it was torn and the seals were also not intact. Brief facts of the case as narrated in the complaint had booked a parcel with the opposite party No. 2 to be sent to Sri Ram Bahadur Singh, Village and Post Daulatpaur, District Balia, Pin-221 713. The appellant had paid Rs. 104/- towards charges for sending the parcel and consequently the opposite party No. 2 had issued receipt No. 4016 in favour of the complainant. The aforesaid parcel contained various cloths amounting to Rs. 3,390/-. The parcel reached its destination in torn condition and the seals were also not intact, so the addressee refused to accept the said parcel. On receipt of the parcel back, the opposite party No. 2 informed the complainant and when the complainant went to the opposite party No. 2 he came to know that all the cloths were taken out of the said parcel. Thereafter, the complainant made a complaint to the opposite party No. 2 but he was asked to make a complaint to the Post Office, Balia, Head Post Office, Raipur and Head Post Office, Nagpur. The complainant acted accordingly. Thereafter the complainant received letters from the Head Post Office, Raipur and Nagpur on 11.3.1999 and 4.3.1999 respectively with an assurance that necessary action is being taken. Later the complainant had sent a reminder to the Head Post Office, Nagpur but vide letter dated 17.8.1999 the Post Master General informed that the matter was beyond his jurisdiction and it was not possible for him to do any thing in the matter. It was also contended that the opposite parties have failed and neglected to rectify the grievance of the complainant despite repeated requests and also despite legal notice and have committed deficiency in service. Consequently, the complainant had filed complaint before the District Forum with a prayer for refund of cloths or in the alternative of the price of cloths Rs. 3,390/- together with interest @ 18% from the date of booking together with costs of proceedings and Rs. 50,000/- towards mental shock and financial loss suffered by the complainant.

In their reply the opposite parties agreed that the complainant had handed over one parcel to the opposite party No. 2 for being sent to Sri Ram Bahadur Singh at his Balia address and also that the complainant had paid charge of Rs. 104/-. However, it was denied that the same contained the articles as mentioned in the complaint and contended that they never knew as to what did the aforesaid parcel contain. The opposite parties contended that the addressee had denied to take delivery of the parcel, actually he should have taken open delivery and should have got the damage assessed by the officers of the Postal Department. It was further contended that the complainant should have made a complaint to the Post Office of the place of destination. The opposite parties had denied allegations of deficiency in service and further that the complainant was not entitled to receive any relief as claimed. In additional pleading the opposite party contended that in view of the provisions contained in Section 6 of the Post Office Act the Postal Department is not liable for any loss during transit.

THE learned District Forum partly allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties to pay jointly and severally a sum of Rs. 3,110/- towards price of cloths and Rs. 104/- towards the charges paid for sending the parcel amounting to a total sum of Rs. 3,214/-. Besides this, learned District Forum also directed to pay interest over the above said sum calculated @ 9% from 16.11.1998 and also Rs. 500/- towards cost of complaint. Being aggrieved by the said order the appellant has come in appeal. The learned Counsel for the appellant assailed the impugned order and urged that the learned District Forum has erred in partly allowing the complaint and holding the appellants/opposite parties jointly severally liable. He further contended that in view of the provisions of Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act the Postal Department is not liable for any loss or damage to the article in transit in the facts and circumstances of the case. In support of his contentions the learned Counsel for the appellants placed reliance on Senior Post Master & Anr. v. Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat, II 1995 (CPJ) 230 (NC).

THE learned Counsel for the complainant/respondent contended that he has suffered great financial loss and mental harassment due to deficiency on the part of the opposite parties/appellants. THE appellant cannot take shelter of Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act. He further contended that the impugned order is just and proper and no interference is called for. The only question to be decided by us is as to whether in view of the provisions contained in Section 6 of the Post Office Act, the learned District Forum has erred in holding the appellants liable? For deciding the aforesaid question it is necessary to consider the provisions contained in Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act and the same reads as under : "Section 6. The Government shall not incur any liability by reasons of the loss, mis-delivery or delay or damage to any postal article in course of transmission by post except insofar as such liability may in express be undertaken by the Central Government as hereinabove provided, and no officer of the Post Office shall incur any liability by reason of any such loss, mis-delivery, delay or damage unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his wilful act or default."

THERE is no allegation in the complaint that the cloths sent by parcel were lost due to any fraudulent act or wilful default of any other officials of the Post Office. Unless such allegations are made and proved by the complainant he cannot get any relief by way of compensation for loss, misdelivery, delay or damage to any postal article in the course of its transmission, in the matter unless there such allegations are made and proved.

IN view of the very clear and unambiguous provisions contained in Section 6 and the decision of Hon''ble National Commission in Senior Post and Anr. v. Akhil Bharatiya Grahak Panchayat (supra), there is no doubt that the section bars the claim of the complainant. We are of the opinion that the learned District Forum has definitely erred by partly allowing the complaint, consequently the said order is set aside. This appeal is allowed. In the circumstances of the case the complainant cannot get any relief as has claimed in the complaint. The complaint is dismissed. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs of proceedings. Appeal allowed.