3

vide GC No. 07605883, dt. 3-1-2009 for delivery at Guntur. At the time of booking of

the parcels, the complainant could not handed over the bills or invoice of the above

said parcels to R1. So, the complainant could not file any documentary evidence

before the Hon’ble forum to show the value of parcels. The complainant is a regular

customer of ANL parcel service, Jammalamadugu and he is well known to the terms

and conditions of the ANL parcel service. After completion of the parcel booking R1

issued G.C copies bearing No. 07605883, dt. 3-1-2009 to the complainant by

agreeing for the terms and conditions incorporated on the consignment. The said

consignment notes was handed over to the complainant. The terms and conditions

in the G.C is that “I/we agree to all the conditions mentioned on the forwarding note

and this G.C note copy and in the event of loss of damage to the parcel our claim

shall be limited to Rs. 5/- per Kg of weight”. Though the complainant is well aware

of the above terms. He suppressed the above said facts and filed this false complaint

with false allegations with intention for getting unlawful gain and cause loss to the

respondents. The value mentioned in the complaint is false and it is invented for the

purpose of filing this complaint only. On the same day R1 dispatched the above 4

said parcels to ANL parcel service Guntur through APSRTC bus No. AP 28 Z : 1100

on 3-1-2009 of Jammalamudugu Depot. But the said parcels were stolen by

miscreants between Ongole and Guntur. On immediate compliance, the above said

bus conductor lodged a complaint at Reningivaram police station and the

investigation is pending and there is no negligence on the part of the respondents.

The complainant has not disclosed the goods at the time of booking of the goods to

know about the missed parcels containing. So after missing of the above said

parcels the complainant with malifide intention he has shown the hire value of the

parcels for getting unlawful gain. It is bounded duty of the complainant that he

should disclose the booking parcels. But he failed to do so, as such the complaint is

4

liable to be dismissed in limini. Both the respondents requested this forum to

dismiss the complaint against them in the interest of justice.

4. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for

determination.

i. Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

ii. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the

respondents?

iii. To what relief?

5. On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A7 were marked and on behalf of

the respondents Ex. B1 to B5 were marked. Oral arguments were heard from both

sides.

6. Point No. 1& 2 Ex. A1 is the carbon copy of receipt of ANL parcel service

bearing GC No. 07605886, dt. 3-1-2009 in favour of the complainant. Ex. A2 is the

carbon copy of receipt of ANL parcel service bearing GC No. 07605887, dt. 3-1-2009

in favour of the complainant. Ex. A3 is the carbon copy of receipt of ANL parcel

service bearing GC No. 07605888, dt. 3-1-2009 in favour of the complainant. Ex. A4

is the copy of legal notice dt. 20-1-2009. Ex. A5 is the original two postal receipts

Nos. 2125 & 2126. Ex. A6 are two postal acknowledgement cards received from both

the respondents. Ex. A7 is the reply letter, dt. 29-1-2009 issued by R2 addressed to

the counsel of the complainant. Ex. B1 is the Xerox copy of Ex. A7. Ex. B2 is the

Xerox copy of letter from Area Manager ANL parcel Service addressed to R1. Ex. B3

is the Xerox copy of letter of the Chief Traffic Manager, APSRTC Hyderabad addressed

to R1, dt. 2-2-2009. Ex. B4 is the Xerox copy of Manifest cum crew challan No.

331870, dt. 3-1-2009. Ex. B5 is the Xerox coy of complaint lodged by the conductor

addressed to Station House Officer, Ranengivaam Police station regarding theft of the

parcels.

7. As could be seen from the documentary evidence, it is a fact that the

complainant booked 3 consignments as per Ex. A1, A2, and A3 each consignment

containing cotton sarees worth of Rs. 30,000/- totaling Rs. 90,000/-. These

5

consignments were booked through R1, on 3-1-2009 which were not reached the

destination in time i.e Mandapet, East Godavari District. According to the

respondents the consignments were stolen by unknown culprits in between Ongole

and Vijayawada and the bus conductor preferred a written complaint before the

Station House Officer, Reningivaram Police station. The concerned police registered a

case and took up investigation vide Ex. B5. The responsibility lies with the

respodnent to make proper arrangements for the transport of the parcels booked with

them with utmost care. Somebody committing theft of the consignments on the way

is not the concerned of the complainant and the respondents are responsible for the

parcels booked by the complainant which have not reached the destination place i.e.

Mandapeta of East Godavari District. The respondents thoroughly failed to prove

their contention and simply lodged a police complaint with regard to the theft of

parcel booked by the complainant will not solve the problem of the complainant. In

view of the documentary evidence on record and facts discussed supra the

complainant deserves consideration in his favour. Hence, the points are answered

accordingly.

8. Point No. 3 In the result, the complaint is allowed. Directing the

respondents 1 & 2 jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 90,000/- (Rupees Ninety

Thousand only) towards the value of the goods without interest and costs and

damages within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced

by us in the open forum, this the 15

MEMBER PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined.

For Complainant : NIL For Respondent : NIL

Exhibits marked for Complainant : -

Ex. A1 Carbon copy of goods consignment note No. 07605886, dt. 3-1-2009.

6

Ex. A2 Carbon copy of goods consignment note No. 07605887, dt. 3-1-2009.

Ex. A3 Carbon copy of goods consignment note No. 07605888, dt. 3-1-2009.

Ex. A4 Copy of legal notice, dt. 20-1-2009 from complainant’s advocate to

respondents.

Ex. A5 Regd. Post slip Nos. 2127 & 2128.

Ex. A6 Post acknowledgements.

Ex. A7 X/c of reply notice from respondent to complainant’s advocate,

dt. 29-1-2009.

Exhibits marked for Respondents: -

Ex. B1 X/c of reply notice from respondents to complainant’s advocate,

dt. 29-1-2009.

Ex. B2 X/c of letter dt. 9-1-2009.

Ex. B3 X/c of letter of the Chief Traffic Manager, APSRTC Hyderabad

addressed to R1, dt. 2-2-2009.

Ex. B4 X/c of Manifest cum crew challan No. 331870, dt. 3-1-2009.

Ex. B5 X/c of complaint lodged by the conductor addressed to Station House

Officer, Ranengivaam Police station regarding theft of the parcels.

MEMBER PRESIDENT

Copy to :-

1) Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate.

2) Sri J. Pullaiah, Advocate.

1) Copy was made ready on :

2) Copy was dispatched on :

3) Copy of delivered to parties :

B.V.P. - - -