JUDGMENT

N. Banikumar Singh, Member.—This First Appeal has been filed under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 challenging the Order dated 29.06.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (District Commission), Bishnupur (Herein after referred to as the District Commission) in Complaint Case No. 1 of 2021.

2. The Complainant who is the present Respondent sent a parcel containing Shirts, shoes, sporting apparels and other items from Margaon to his home at Moirang on 21.04.2021, through Post Office vide receipt of Pt No. CM693800838IN and CM693800855IN. On 28.05.2031 he was communicated by the concern postal authority that the said parcels was found in less weight and torn condition. Thereafter, the said parcels was opened in presence of the father of the Complainant at Moirang Post Office SO and found many valuable articles missing and Complainant lodged complaint in that regard to the concern Post Office authority but with no positive result thereof. Hence, the Complainant filed the Consumer Complaint Case No. 1 of 2021 claiming reliefs thereof.

3. The District Commission passed the impugned order dated 29.06.2022 ordering the Opposite Parties now Appellants to refund the Cost of lost articles amounting to Rs. 41,000/- with compensation amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- for causing mental agony and loss to the Complainant and another sum of Rs. 20,000/- as cost of the complaint.

4. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the Appellant preferred the present First Appeal on the following amongst other grounds :-

i) That, Learned District Commission over looked the provision of law under Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, which gives complete immunity for loss, mis-delivery, delay or damage to any postal article in the course of transmission by post.

ii) That, the Post Office is not a common carrier, nor an agent for the sender.

iii) That the Complainant failed to claim that the postal authority was guilty of fraud or willful act or willful default for the pilferage of postal articles.

iv) That there were many material irregularities while passing the impugned order.

v) That the complainant was not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act.

vi) That the maximum compensation payable in case of loss of the Express parcel post or content thereof shall be restricted to Rs. 500/- or the value of the parcel or the contents lost whichever is less as per Rule. 33.A (f) of the Indian Postal Act. 1933.

5. The Complainant who is the present Respondent filed his written submission refuting the claims of the Appellants on the following amongst other grounds :-

a. The First Appeal of the Appellant is barred by limitation.

b. Many valuable articles sent were not found in the parcels and complaint thereof was lodged to the superintendent of Post Offices, Manipur Division.

c. The Appellants never take up any action in respect of the said Complaint ;and therefore compelled to file the consumer complaint praying for grant of reliefs.

d. The District Commission passed the impugned order after considering the relevant facts and circumstances of the case and therefore the impugned order need no interference.

6. Heard both parties at length and perused the records of the case. And, after hearing the parties and records of the First Appeal we found the first important to be considered i.e. whether the present First Appeal is barred by limitation.

7. Under Section 41, of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 it is provided that :-

“41. Appeal against the District Commission – Any person aggrieved by an order made by the District Commission may prefer an appeal against such order to the State Commission on the grounds of facts or law within a period of forty-five days from the date of the order, in such form and manner, as may be prescribed:

Provided that the State Commission may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of forty-five days, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient c