Whether post office is liable to damages for late delivery of postal article?

In order to consider the plea raised at the Bar, it would be appropriate to notice Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 which states as under:—

“6. Exemption from liability for loss, misdelivery, delay or damage.- The 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 in so far 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.

9. From a perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is clear that the Post Office which is run by the Government shall not be liable for delay caused in delivery of the postal articles either by ordinary or registered post, except the liability which may be expressed in terms undertaken by the Central Government. 

In the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur

(Before Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.)

 Post Master, Main Post Office, 

v.

 Rajesh Nag S/o Puran Lal Nag,

WPC No. 312 of 2015

Decided on July 19, 2018

Citation: 2018 SCC OnLine Chh 552 : AIR 2018 Chh 156

Print Page

Whether Magistrate can work as post office and transmit every complaint for registration of FIR?

Allowing aggrieved people to hold police machinery to ransom would affect the morale and functioning of the machinery, said the Bombay High Court recently while quashing an FIR filed against three police officers.The court said that the magistrate court, which ordered for the FIR, could not act as a “post office” and transmit everyapplication for investigation.

“Allowing the aggrieved or disgruntled persons to hold the police machinery at ransom by unjustifiable vexatious persecution will affect the morale and effective functioning of the police machinery. This in turn will have serious and far-reaching adverse impact on the interest of the society,” the court said while offering the relief.

Print Page