S.K. Kulshrestha, President:
1. This appeal assails the order dated 18.12.1009 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. Rewa in C.C. No. 224/2008 whereby for non -delivery of a postal article, the District Forum has directed to refund charged Rs. 25 and has awarded compensation for mental agony a sum of Rs. 25,000. A sum of Rs. 1,000 has been awarded as costs and the judgment directs that if within 30 days amount is not paid, 8% p.a. interest would be chargeable.
2. In short, the facts of the case are that on 16.10.2007 a speed post envelope containing two drafts of the value of Rs. 1,60,000 were entrusted to the post office speed post. This envelope was not delivered and when enquiry was made, it revealed that the envelope was not sent at all and it was returned to the sender on 31.10.2007. It was in this backdrop that the claim for compensation was made.
3. The Post office has denied any liability for non delivery of the postal article and referred to the exemption granted by Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act. 1898 and Rule 66B of the Post Office Speed Post Rules.
4. Learned Counsel for the appellant has referred to Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 which reads as follows:
"6. Exemption from liability for loss, misdelivery, delay or damageâThe Government shall not incur any liability by reason of the loss, misdelivery or delay of or damage to, any postal article in course of transmission by post, except insofar 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, misdelivery, delay or damage, unless he has caused the same fraudulently or by his wilful act or default.
From the above it is clear that exception is only one and that is where an officer of the post office by reasoning of any such loss, misdelivery, delay or damage incurs the liability provided he has caused the same fraudulently or by his wilful act or default.
Rule 66B of Post Office Speed Post Rules read as follows:
âIn case of any delay of domestic speed post articles beyond the norms determined by the Department of Post from time-to-time, the compensation to be provided shall be equal to the composite speed post charge paid.
In the event of loss of domestic speed post article or loss of its contents or damage to the contents, compensation shall be double the amount of composite speed post charges paid or Rs. 1.000, whichever is less.â
Rule restricts the amount to double the amount of speed post charges."
5. Learned Counsel for the Department therefore submits that even if this Commission were to hold that the Department is liable, only double charges namely Rs. 50 are payable.
6. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned Counsel for the respondent has invited attention to the judgment of the National. Commission reported in II (2009) CPJ 40 (NC)=2009 (1) CPR 286 (NC), The Branch Post Master, Village and Post Jaitpur and Ors. v. Chandra Shekhar Pandey, which deals with non-delivery of the postal article as wilful act and deliberate and intentional negligence when it was not delivered. In the present case the article did not move from custody of the appellant and wilful negligence is patent.
7. Learned Counsel for the Department per contra has invited attention to the judgment of the National Commission in Post Master Imphal v. Jamini Devi Sagolband, I (2000) CPJ 28 (NC)=(2000) NCJ 142.
8. In the present case the case falls within four corners of the exception and displays a glaring example of wilful negligence. Under these circumstances, the official being negligent is liable to pay the amount.
9. Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that even if it is assumed that there is negligence, concerned official not being a party, no compensation can be granted deliberately negligent. The Post Office has to find who is negligent.
10. From the above we are clear that respondent is entitled to compensation for negligence. Accordingly award of Rs. 25 as postal charges is just and proper. However, Rs. 25,000 awarded by the District Forum is quite high in view of the legal position restricting the liability of the Central Government and we therefore award costs of Rs. 3,000 and the amount awarded by the District Forum is set aside. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.