Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/193/2011

Pankaj Bhutani - Complainant(s)

Versus

Agarwal Packers & Movers, - Opp.Party(s)

12 Jul 2011

ORDER


CHANDIGARH DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-IPlot No. 5-B, Sector 19-B, Madhya marg, Chandigarh - 160019
CONSUMER CASE NO. 193 of 2011
1. Pankaj Bhutani R/o House No. 1807, 1st Floor, Sector 33-D, Chandigarh. ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. Agarwal Packers & Movers, Plot No. 182/51, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh through its Manager.2. DRS Dilip Roodlines Pvt. Ltd. Corporate Office, 306, 3rd Floor, Kabra Complex, 61-M.G. Road, secundrabad-500003 through its Manager.3. DRS Logistics (P) Ltd, Regd. Office Kabra Complex, 61-M.G. Road, Secundrabad-500003 Through its Manager. ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :
For the Respondent :

Dated : 12 Jul 2011
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                

Consumer Complaint No

:

193 of 2011

Date of Institution

:

07.04.2011

Date of Decision   

:

12.07.2011

 

 

 

1]  Pankaj Bhutani r/o House No. 1807, 1st floor, Sector 33-D, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

 

                 V E R S U S

1]  Agarwal Packers & Movers, Plot No.182/51, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh through its Manager.

2]  DRS Dilip Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Office, 306, 3rd floor, Kabra Complex, 61-M.G.  Road, Secundrabad-500 003 through its manager.

3]  DRS Logistics (P) Ltd. Regd. Office Kabra Complex, 61 M.G. Road, Secundrabad 500 003 through its manager.

 

                      ……Opposite Parties

 

CORAM:   SH.P.D.GOEL                   PRESIDENT

         SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL        MEMBER

              DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA   MEMBER

 

 

Argued by: Sh.H.P.S. Kochhar, Counsel for Complainant.

          OPs exparte.

   

PER RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER

          Brief facts of the case are that the complainant while shifting from Bangalore to Chandigarh availed services of OPs for packing, storing and moving household goods. The complainant averred that the OPs packed his household goods in 60 packages worth Rs.1,98,500/- and stored with them and list thereof was issued to him. The complainant paid  3% premium on the total amount of goods worth Rs.1,98,500 for special contract risk coverage under C.R. and OPs issued Annexure C-2 dated 2.8.2009   and GC No. 4015279 dated 2.8.2009 and receipt No.40121020 dated 2.8.2009 to that effect. The complainant through a email to the OPs got extended the storage time for another 6 months and undertook to pay the extended charges.  In September, 2010 the complainant visited the office of OP for getting transferred the 60 packages along with 2 more packages worth Rs.1 lac and the OPs booked all the 62 packages of the household goods.  The complainant also paid extra amount @3% of the total worth of goods of Rs.2,98,000/- for special contract for risk cover under C.R. (Annexure C10). The complainant alleged that when on 21.9.2010 the household goods reached at Chandigarh several packages/ items were found damaged and mutilated and the complainant made a note to this effect on the lorry copy and also handed over the damaged goods to the OPs through lorry. The complainant lodged a complainant with the local office of the OPs and requested for compensation as he has paid charges @3% of the total value of goods under special contract for risk coverage under CR for the damage but to no effect. Hence this complainant.

 

2.        Notice of the complaint was sent to OPs seeking their version of the case. OPs did not turn up, despite due service of notice, therefore, they were proceeded against exparte. 

 

3.        Complainant led evidence in support of his contentions.

4.        We have heard the learned counsel for the Complainant and have also perused the record, with utmost care and circumspection.

5.        The averments made in the complaint stand corroborated from the affidavit of the complainant, as well as the Annexures C-1 to C-19.  Admittedly, the Complainant availed the services of OPs to pack his household goods, store and move the same from Bangalore to Chandigarh. A close scrutiny of Annexure C-1, which is a packing list, issued by the OPs, would show that the OPs packed the household goods of the Complainant in 60 packages. The said list contained particulars of goods, status of goods and value of the goods, respectively. Further, vide Annexure C-8, the Complainant booked two more packages with the OPs, thereby making a total of 62 packages, for being shifted from their Godown to the address at Chandigarh.

 

6.        The Complainant has specifically alleged that the 62 packages of his household goods reached Chandigarh on 21.09.2010, through the road lines of the OPs, but several of the packages/ items were damaged and mutilated. This fact stands corroborated from the G.R. (Annexure C-14), on the backside of which, the Complainant, while receiving the goods, had specifically made an endorsement to the effect that he had received the goods in an unpacked and damaged condition, detail of which has duly been mentioned in para no. 10 of the complaint. This evidence proves beyond shadow of doubt that the goods were delivered to the complainant in a damaged and mutilated condition. Otherwise also, the evidence led by the complainant has gone un-rebutted and un-controverted by the OPs. 

 

7.        Further, Annexure C-18 is a demand/ complaint dated 01.10.2010, made by the Complainant with the OPs, which was duly received by the OPs under the signatures of one Mr. Kuldeep Sharma. The said complaint enlisted the item numbers, along with the value of the goods to the tune of Rs.30,000/- and the description of the goods.

8.        Now, it is clear that the Complainant had noticed and brought the description and value of the damaged items to the notice of the OPs. But the OPs have failed to settle the claim of the Complainant, till date.

 

9.        The OPs were served, but they did not care to contest the claim of the Complainant, as such, it can be concluded without any hesitation that either the OPs admit the claim of the Complainant or they have nothing to say in the matter. More so, the evidence led by the Complainant goes unrebutted.

 

10.       In view of above discussion, the Complainant is entitled to the value of the damaged goods as per the declaration in the packing list and demand Annexure C-18. Failure of the OPs to make good the loss suffered by the Complainant on account of their negligible handling of the goods, in the circumstances mentioned above, surely and definitely amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs.

 

11.       As a result of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed ex-parte and the OPs are directed to pay, jointly and severally, a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the Complainant towards the cost of the value of good damaged, along with compensation of Rs.7,000/- for physical harassment & mental agony and litigation expenses amounting to Rs.5,000/-, within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which OPs shall, jointly and severally, pay Rs.37,000/-, along with interest @9% per annum to the Complainant from the date of filing of the instant complaint i.e. 07.04.2011, till the date of realization, besides paying the costs of litigation of Rs.5,000/-.

 

12.       Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

 

 

      

Sd/-

Sd/-

Sd/-

July 12, 2011

[Madanjit Kaur Sahota]

[Rajinder Singh Gill]

[P.D. Goel]

 

Member

Member

President


MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBERHONABLE MR. P. D. Goel, PRESIDENT DR. MRS MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER