Parcel arrives torn with missing contents, man wins Rs 40,000 from postal authorities

4 min readNew DelhiJul 13, 2026 06:30 PM IST

The complainant alleged that despite approaching the postal authorities repeatedly to trace the missing articles and compensate him for the loss, no effective action was taken. (AI-generated image)

A consumer body in Punjab recently directed the postal authorities to compensate a customer after a parcel containing clothes worth Rs 35,360 reached its destination in a torn condition with nearly half its contents missing.

President Kiranjit Kaur Arora and member Suman Khanna of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ferozepur, observed that the damage to the parcel amounted to gross deficiency in service and directed the authorities to pay Rs 35,360, which is the value of the missing clothes, along with Rs 5,000 towards compensation for harassment and litigation expenses.

“Damage of the parcel…during transaction amounts to gross deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and harassment of the complainant on account of damage of the parcel in question cannot be ruled out. Therefore, the opposite parties are also liable to pay suitable compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant,” the order dated July 1 read.

The complainant stated that his son sent a parcel from the head post office, Ferozepur Cantonment, to the post office in Bidar. According to the complainant, the parcel weighed 17.2 kg at the time of booking and contained clothes worth Rs 35,360. It was alleged that the parcel reached Bidar post office in a torn condition and weighed only 8.39 kg. The intended recipient refused to accept the damaged parcel after noticing the discrepancy.

The complainant alleged that despite approaching the postal authorities repeatedly to trace the missing articles and compensate him for the loss, no effective action was taken. He sought reimbursement of the value of the clothes, Rs 1 lakh as compensation for mental harassment, and litigation expenses.

The postal department admitted that the parcel had been booked with a weight of 17.2 kg and that an internal inquiry revealed it had arrived in a torn condition.

It submitted that the parcel had left the booking office in good condition and that the Railway Mail Service (RMS) HB Division, Kalaburagi, had failed to respond to an error report regarding the damaged consignment. The department also argued that the complainant had not submitted the prescribed claim form and that, under the Post Office Guide, compensation for damage to a registered article was limited to Rs 100.

Story continues below this ad

‘Postal authorities duty-bound’

The commission noted that the postal authorities are duty-bound for proper storage and handling the parcel during transportation till its delivery to the receiver. It noted that the complainant had shown convincing evidence to prove his case.

It held that the postal authority was liable to compensate the complainant, holding that the damage to the parcel amounted to gross deficiency in service. It also held them liable to compensate the complainant for the harassment and litigation expenses.

The commission directed the postal authorities to pay Rs 35,360 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the filing of the complaint till its realisation. It further directed to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation for harassment and litigation expenses. The commission ordered compliance with the order within a period of 45 days.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and Union territories (Punjab: 0800-22577) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Story continues below this ad

Stolen consignment

In another case, a Srinagar consumer commission directed the postal department to pay over Rs 2.21 lakh to two brothers whose consignment containing 38 mobile phones, chargers and batteries was allegedly stolen while being transported from New Delhi to Srinagar in 2004.

President Dr Farah Deeba and member Shabnam Munshi were hearing a plea filed by two brothers, Sheikh Farooq Aziz and Sheikh Khalid Aziz, who observed that the speed post centre cannot simultaneously offer a public postal service and then avoid liability by arguing that consumers should not use it for transporting valuable goods.

© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd

Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience.

Expertise

Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents.

Specialized Legal Reporting: His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of India's top courts into clear, actionable news. His expertise includes:

Judicial Analysis: Breaking down complex orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts.

Legal Developments: Monitoring legislative changes and their practical implications for the public and the legal fraternity.

Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes:

Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law.

Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates.

Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More

Tags:

consumer court

Ferozepur

post office