State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
1.Sub Postmaster, Department Of Post ... vs Dr. Vinod Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri Chet ... on 16 July, 2012
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No.184 of 2010 Date of Institution: 15.02.2010 Date of Decision: 16.07.2012 1. Sub Postmaster, Department of Post India, Sector VIII, Post Office, Panchkula. 2. Sr. Supdt. Of Post Offices, Department of Post India, Ambala Division, Ambala. 3. The Sr. Supdt. Of Foreign Post AIR Mail Sorting Division, New Delhi-110021. Appellants (Ops) Versus Dr. Vinod Kumar Sharma son of Shri Chet Ram Sharma, r/o House No.236, Sector-IX, Panchkula, Haryana. Respondent (Complainant) BEFORE: Honble Mr. Justice R.S. Madan, President. Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member. For the Parties: Shri G.C. Babbar, Advocate for appellants. Respondent exparte. O R D E R
Justice R.S. Madan, President:
This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 24.12.2009 passed by District Consumer Forum, Panchkula in complaint No.169/2009 whereby following direction was issued to the appellants-opposite parties:-
..we hereby allowed ht instant complaint & direct the Ops as under:-
I. To pay a sum of Rs.1975/- to the complainant on account of loss of his packet sent through registered post on 3/4/2008.
II.
To pay lump sum compensation of Rs.3,000/- on account of mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation.
Let the order be complied with within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled for interest @ 7% p.a. on the amount of compensation from the date of order till payment.
Undisputed facts of the present case are that the respondent-complainant had sent a packet weighted 575 gms in which some important precious research material of Ph.D (Commerce) part of thesis were sent to complainants daughter Ms. Nidhi Agnihotri, 3/483, SANDGATE ROAD, BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA vide receipt No.fgn-AIR-RLA 776 dated 03.04.2008 through post office Sector-8, Panchkula for which Rs.385/- were paid as postal charges by the complainant. The above said postal article was delivered at the destination on 01.05.2009. Thus, alleging it as deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant invoked the jurisdiction of the District Consumer Forum seeking compensation from the opposite parties.
Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing written statement stating therein that the provisions of Indian Post Office Act 1898 are applicable in the instant case and therefore no compensation can be granted to the complainant. However, the opposite parties admitted the delay in delivering the postal article at the destination as stated in the preceding para of this order.
On appraisal of the pleadings of the parties and the evidence adduced on the record, District Consumer Forum accepted complaint and issued direction to the opposite parties as noticed in the opening para of this order with the following observations:-
9. It is also contended by the Ops that in view of instructions contained Convention Chapter 5 Article 34 clause 2.1.1 the indemnity for the loss of a registered item shall amount to 30 SDR including the cost of the charges paid on the posting the item & in view of instructions contained vide letter Memo No.1-21/2005-Rates dated 30/11/05 issued by Govt. of India Ministry of Communication & information technology Department of Posts Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi I SDR=Rupees 65.8437. Thus it is contended the complainant can maximum be awarded a sum of Rs.1 SDR x 30 x 65.84.37=1975/-
In view of this statutory provisions, we find that the complaint is entitled for maximum compensation to the tune of Rs.1975/- in respect of loss of his packet sent through registered post.
Aggrieved against the order of the District Forum, the opposite parties have come up in appeal.
Heard.
On behalf of the appellants it is contended that so far as granting of compensation in respect of late delivery of the parcel is concerned, the same has been assessed as per rules but so far as the granting of litigation expenses of Rs.3,000/-, the same is not tenable in the eyes of law and is liable to be set aside.
Having taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that the litigation expenses of Rs.3,000/- are on higher side and we reduce it from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.500/-. Rest of the order passed by the District Forum is maintained.
With the aforesaid modification in the impugned order, this appeal stands disposed of.
The statutory amount of Rs.2488/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellants against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal and revision, if any filed in this case.
Announced: Justice R.S. Madan 16.07.2012 President B.M. Bedi Judicial Member