SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICE Vs. A SANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant intended to buy bumper lottery ticket of the value of Rs.10/- each from K. A. S. Ramdas of Trichy and sent money order for Rs.50/-. The said amount of Rs.50/- was not disbursed to K. A. S. Ramadas but only a sum of Rs.5/- was received by him on 7.12.1998 for which he sent two tickets for Vaigai 48th draw. The complainant had sent the amount of Rs.50/- for purchase of Christmas Bumper Lottery ticket which had the price value of Rs.50,00,000/-. On account of the deficiency in service by the opposite parties, the complainant had received only tickets of the value of Rs.5/-. Therefore, the complainant went to the Head Post Office and enquired about the non-receipt. The opposite parties did not give any suitable reply. On account of the careless and negligence of the postal department, the complainant has been put to mental hardship, sufferings and loss. The complainant, therefore, prays for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/-.

(2.) The opposite parties filed a version pleading thus: The allegations made in the complaint are denied. It is true that a money order for Rs.50/- was booked at Tuticorin Head Post Office on 3.12.1998 under Receipt No.7035. while transmitting the above mentioned money order, the money order was transmitted through V. SAT for Rs.5/- instead of Rs.50/- inadvertently. After coming to know of the fact, the balance of Rs.45/- was ordered to be paid to the payee on 6.4.1999. Sec.48 of the Indian Post Office Act, exempts the Post Office from liability in respect of money order. No suit or proceedings will lie. The wrong payment of a money order caused by incorrect or incomplete information given by the remitter as to the name and address incomplete information, there was reasonable justification for accepting the information as a sufficient description for the purpose of identifying the payee the Department can't be made liable. 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 any other cause whatsoever other than the fraud or wilful act or default of such officer is also covered under Sec.48. Further under Sec.6 of the Indian Post Office Act, no officer of the Post Office can be held liable for loss, misdelivery or damage caused to any postal article unless such delay, damage or misdelivery was caused fraudulently or by his wilful act or default. There is no wilful act on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the complaint be dismissed with cost.

(3.) The District Forum by its order dated 23.9.1999 allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- and a cost of Rs.250/-.