Post office asked to pay Rs 3,000 for delay in sending EMO

NAGPUR: Gondia Consumer Disputers Redressal Forum directed the Gondia Head Post Office and its sub-post master to pay Rs 3,000 to a lawyer for delay in transferring Rs 111 towards Shagun (gift) of marriage to his relative in scheduled time.
A division bench of judges comprising president MG Chilbule and member HM Pateriya asked both parties to pay Rs 2,000 towards the compensation for mental torture and agony to the complaint and another Rs 1,000 to the cost of litigation in a month.
They were further told to pay interest at 9% per annum to the complainant, if they failed to pay the fine before the given deadline.
According to complainant Sudhir Rathod, a resident of Gondia, marriage of his relative’s son was to be solemnized on May 2 last year at Chhindwara. As he was unable to attend it due to unavoidable circumstances, he decided to send the “Shagun of marriage” as per Hindu custom on April 27, 2015, by Electronic Money Order/Transfer (EMO) through sub-post master with City Post Office at Ram Nagar in Gondia. After sending Rs111, he intimated to the relative about it.
Introduced on October 10, 2008, the EMO simplifies transmission process for money transfer by securing quick and secure electronic transmission. The time for transfer is quick and the cash is paid at doorsteps of the receiver.
Ironically, the EMO was delivered on May 12, 2015, after a delay of 14 days. Subsequently, the lawyer had to face humiliation and criticism, as the Shagun amount reached after the marriage.
He then lodged a complaint with post office where he came to know that it was delayed due to technical glitch that TCS engineers had not migrated the server in indiapost.gov.in in domain, due to which all communications can’t run properly.
Rathod even filed two RTI applications seeking explanation from the post officials for delay, but couldn’t get exact details. With no other way out, he approached the consumer forum by praying for Rs 15,000 towards damages for deficiency in service, mental torture, suffering negligence in service, and another Rs 10,000 for legal expenses.
The judges observed that deficiency caused due to delay in service of EMO, is maintainable under Section 12 of ‘Consumer Protection Act, 1986’.
“The technical delay is not justified by lame excuse that the computerized system was failure and not repaired by the engineer. Such unreasonable delay, definitely amounts to deficiency in service for which complainant is entitled for reasonable damages,” the forum ruled.