Tribunals and Commissions

POSTMASTER, MEL MADAVEETHI vs A.MUTHUKUMAR

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 9 May 1996 · Citation: 1996 3 CPJ 243

HON’BLE JUDGES
E.J.Bellie , Angel Arulraj J.
RESULT
Appeal allowed
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 406 words
1.

THE only question that arises for consideration in the appeal is whether by virtue of Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act (Act 4 of 1988) the Postal Department is liable to pay damages for loss of a registered letter during transit.

2.

ACCORDING to the complainant/respondent herein the registered cover contained a demand draft for Rs. 5,780/-. The registered cover did not reach the addressee at all even after a long time. The complainant has sought for damages on these grounds. The opposite party Postal Department contended inter alia that in view of Section 6 of the Indian Post and Telegraphs Act they are absolved from liability.

The District Forum would seem to say that since the article is a registered cover the Postal Department cannot avail of the benefit under Section 6. Finding thus the District Forum ordered an a ward for payment of the value of the demand draft i.e. Rs. 5,780/- and compensation of Rs. 500/- with a cost of Rs. 200/-.

3.

IN the appeal we find that the contention raised by the Postal Department is quite sound and acceptable and in view of that the order of the District Forum cannot be sustained. Section 6 of the INdian Post and Telegraphs Act reads as follows : "Exemption from liability for loss, misdelivery, delay or damage-The Government shall not incur any liability by reason of the loss, mis-delivery or delay of, or damage to, any postal article in course of transmission by post, except in so far as such liability may in express terms be undertaken by the Central Government as hereinafter 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."

It is not the case of the complainant that the Government has given any undertaking in express terms as regards the liability. That being the case, it is clear that the Department can take shelter under Section 6 and claim that they are not liable. IN this view of the matter we find that the order of the District Forum giving an award cannot be sustained. In the result, therefore, the appeal is allowed; the order of the District Forum is set aside and the complaint is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs in the appeal. Appeal allowed.