Order

Heard Miss.S.Patra,learned Central Govt.counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent.

2. This appeal is filed U/S-15 of erstwhile Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.

3. The case of the complainant, in nutshell is that the complainant sent the original documents for admission in Jyoti Vihar,Burla on 23.08.2007 by Speed post from Jharsuguda Post Office, but the documents did not reached the destination. Therefore, he made query and but no action was taken by the OP. Therefore, he made claim before the OP for compensation and cost.

4. The OP filed written version stating that they have received the postal articles but they are lost for which they paid double the speed post charges as per Rule. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

5. After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum passed the following order:-

Xxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxx “ The complaint petition is allowed. The Ops are directed to pay compensation worth Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand) jointly and severally to the complainant within two months from the date of receipt of this order. Further the Ops are directed to pay Rs.500/-(Rupees Five thousand) to the complainant towards cost of the proceeding within the aforesaid time.”

6. Learned Central Govt. counsel for the appellant submitted that learned District Forum has committed error in law by not going through the necessary law for awarding the double speed post charges in the event of the loss of the postal articles. She tried to convince us that since the speed post charge has already been paid, there is no cause of action to file the case. Therefore, he submitted to set-aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.

7. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties, perused the DFR and impugned order.

8. It is admitted fact that the complainant had sent her documents including bank draft to the Jyoti Vihar,Sambalpur. It is also admitted fact that the postal articles does not reach the destination and after query they paid the double speed post charges to the complainant. Now the question arises whether the complainant proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. No doubt the complainant has sent the documents by speed post but it has been missed. Of course she cited the Rules of Central Govt. Notiification dtd.22.01.1999 vide Annexure A/2 where it has been mentioned that “in the event of delay of domestic speed post articles beyond the prescribed delivery norms published from time to time, as a part of journey back guarantee, the speed post charges paid by the customer will be refunded, subject to the condition that :-

(i) Delay due to curfew, bandhs and strike etc. will not count as delay in delivery and such days of interruption will be excluded from the total days taken in delivery of articles.

(ii) The article booked ‘beyond cut off time will be counted as booked on the next day and will be marked as “Booked after cut off time”.

(iii) In the event of loss of a speed post article, loss of contents or damage to the contents, the compensation payable to the customer will be double the speed post charges or Rs.1000/- whichever is less.”

9. No doubt the payment of double speed post amount has been paid by the OP by complying the rule of Govt. of India. But the mental agony of the student for not getting the admit card or the documents allowing her to sit in the examination can not be forgotten. On the otherhand, there must have been giving pain and harassment to the complainant. Inspite of giving charges the complainant is entitled to compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the Op for missing of the postal articles by speed post which is definitely due to negligence on the part of the OP. Therefore, the complainant has proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OP