P.L.BANSAL vs SPEEDWAY COURIERS LTD.

THE complainant entrusted his application to the respondent on 27.1.95 at their Sangrur office and it was to be delivered at the office of the Himachal State Public Service Commission at Shimla on or before 31.1.95. THE usual charges were Rs. 20/-, however, on a request that it was most urgent the respondent charged a sum of Rs. 100/-. On 17.2.95 the application together with the postal order of the fee was received from the aforesaid service commission with the objection that it was not received in the office on or before the last date which was 31.1.95. This letter is attached with the complaint. It has been alleged that the complainant had an experience of 12 years at the Bar and he could not take the examination on account of the deficiency in service on the part of the respondent Couriers. THE complainant has claimed compensation in the sum of Rs. 10 lacs. THE head office of respondent is located at Chandigarh.

A reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent wherein it has been averred that the application was delivered to the Himachal Public Service Commission, Shimla on 31.1.95 well within time and that there was no deficiency on their part. Even otherwise the liability according to the terms contained on receipt issued was limited only upto Rs. 250/-. There is a letter dated 17.2.95 from Himachal State Public Service Commission which shows that the application together with the Indian Postal Order of Rs. 100/- was returned to the complainant because it was received there after the expiry of the last date which was 31.1.95. The plea of the respondent that 28th January, 1995 was a holiday and the packet could not be delivered at Shimla. The version that it was delivered on 31.1.95 does not find support from any piece of evidence. The forms relied upon by the respondent at pages 31 and 33 of the record show that on 28th January, 1995 the packet could not be delivered at Shimla because it was not acceptable on that day being a holiday being a Saturday. On page 33 there is no clear entry of this packet whether it is 5912 or some other number and even in the column pertaining to destination, there is no signature of any recipient nor any note that it was delivered and if so on what date. Had the packet been delivered on 31.1.95, there was no reason for the Himachal State Public Service Commission to return it together with the Indian Postal Order of Rs. 100/- mentioning the specific reason that it was not received on or before the last date i.e., 31.1.95. There is no name or address or affidavit of the. person who carried the packet and allegedly delivered at the destination on 31.1.95. We hold that there was deficiency on the part of the respondent.

On behalf of the complainant our attention has been drawn to M/s. Skypak Couriers Pvt. Ltd. v. Ms. Anupama Bagla, I (1992) CPJ 84 (NC)=1993 (1) COn.LT 334 where the Couriers failed to deliver an application for admission in Sophia College, Bombay and on account of deficiency compensation of Rs. 10,000/- was awarded. In the case now in hand the complainant is a practising Lawyer, he wanted to take the competitive examination for entry in Himachal Judicial Service. During the course of arguments on our inquiry we came to know that the complainant did take competitive examination in his own home State earlier but he could not succeed. The contention that the maximum amount which could be recovered was Rs. 250/- printed on the receipt is not acceptable in view of the deficiency after having received extra charges. It is immaterial that the complainant having a standing of more than 12 years and may not be financially lagging behind. Consider ing all these circumstances we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 7,500/- on account of deficiency in service and we hereby order accordingly. This shall be payable by the respondent within two months failing which the complainant shall be entitled to interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this judgment.

ANNOUNCED. The order be communicated to the parties free of charge. Complaint allowed.