The District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Tiruchi, recently ordered the Department of Posts to pay compensation to a woman for non-delivery of a new cellphone sent through speed post.
Ms. Theresa Sahayanathan sent the instrument through speed post from the Kallakudi post office in January 2012 to Coimbatore.
As it was not delivered even after a week, Mrs. Sahayanathan tracked the speed post article movement online and found that the article had reached Coimbatore Speed Post section and did not move thereafter.
When she claimed compensation for the loss of the mobile phone from the Postmaster General of Tiruchi and Coimbatore, they refused her request and offered to pay only Rs. 112.
The woman approached the Consumer Protection Council, Tamil Nadu, which filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Tiruchi, seeking compensation. The council secretary S. Pushpavanam argued that the Coimbatore Speed Post section was a small room and that it should be possible for the department to trace the phone. Failure to do so implied that there had been wilful default and negligence on the part of the postal employees.
Counsel for Union government A. Rajendran argued that Section 6 of the Post Office Act protects post office employees and that a compensation of Rs.112 being double the value of postage according to rules had been offered and the article should have been insured.
After hearing both sides, the forum president S. Sengottaiyan and member M. Maraikamalai said Section 6 does not give absolute protection and held that the Department of Posts had committed deficiency of service against the complainant.
The Forum directed the Postmaster General of Tiruchi and Coimbatore and Chief Postmaster General, Tamil Nadu, to pay Rs. 3,900 towards the cost of the mobile phone and a compensation of Rs.5,000 with 6 per cent interest from the date of complaint till the date of payment besides a cost of Rs. 2,000 to the complainant.
