SUB-POSTMASTER Vs. ANIK LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , arises out of the order dated 30.11.1999 passed by the District Forum, Ludhiana, whereby the opposite party was directed to pay Rs.500/- as compensation and Rs.200/- as costs to the complainant.

(2.) The facts in brief are that the complainant sent money order for Rs.2,000/- to his son-in-law - Mr. Lalu Paswan on 12.8.1998 and another money order for Rs.2,000/- on 13.8.1998 to his father-in-law - Sh. Sahdev Paswan. The payment of the money orders were not made to addressees. The complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum. The opposite parties filed written version and admitted that the complainant sent two money orders on 12.8.1998 and 13.8.1998 for Rs.2,000/- each. According to the opposite parties the same were despatched for payment. The money order bearing No.856 dated 17.8.1998 for Rs.2,000/- was received back with the remarks "not-known" as the address of the payee was wrong. The Deputy Director, Kapurthala has been approached for making the payment back of the said money order to the complainant. Regarding the other money order, it is stated that duplicate money order was sent on 7.7.1999 and the payment was ordered to be made. There was no wilful delay in making payment. After hearing the parties and on the basis of material on record the District Forum passed the impugned order against which the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant invited our attention to Sec.48 of the Indian Post Offices Act which confers an absolute exemption from liability on the appellant department for delayed payment of money order, unless it is occasioned by fraud or wilful act of a particular postal employee. Learned Counsel for the appellants argued that in the present case there is no allegation made by the complainant that there was any fraud or wilful act of a particular postal employee having committed. The relevant Sec.48 of the Indian Post Offices Act, 1898 is reproduced below : "48. Exemption from liability in respect of money orders-No suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted against the Government or any officer of the Post Office in respect of,- (a)anything done under any rules made by the Central Government under this Chapter; or (b)the wrong payment of a money order caused by incorrect or incomplete information given by the remitter as to the name and address of the payee, provided that, as regards incomplete information, there was reasonable justification for accepting the information as a sufficient description for the purpose of identifying the payee; or (c)the payment of any money order being refused or delayed by, or on account of, any accidental neglect, omission or mistake by, or on the part of, an officer of the Post Office, or for any other cause whatsoever, other than the fraud or wilful act or default of such officer; or (d)any wrong payment of a money order after the expiration of one year from the date of the issue of the order; or (e)any wrong payment or delay in payment of a money order beyond the limits of India by an officer of any Post Office, not being one established by the Central Government. "