Complainant through Lrd. Adv. Deshmukh
Opponent No. 1 through Lrd. Adv. Abhyankar
Opponent No. 2 through Lrd. Adv. Pawar
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--
Per : Mr. V. P. Utpat, President Place : PUNE
// J U D G M E N T //
(23/04/2014)
This complaint is filed by a private limited company through its Director against the Courier Services Pvt. Ltd. for deficiency in service under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts are as follows,
1] The complainant is a private company having its business at Yawat Railway Station, Tal. Daund, Dist – Pune. The opponent no. 1 and 2 are Head office, regional office and branch office of Anjani Courier Services (P) Ltd. It is the case of the complainant that, it had booked goods for delivery to his customers weighing 30 kg worth of Rs. 3,09,226/- to Vardhaman Remedies Pvt. Ltd., Boiser, Dst. Thane through the opponent on 29/09/2010. The opponent had charged Rs. 990/- and Rs. 20/-. However, the said goods were not delivered to Vardhaman Remedies Pvt. Ltd. within four days and the complainant had received call from the said party about non delivery of the goods. Hence, complainant made complaint to the opponent and also issued notice. On making search, it was disclosed that the opponent has lost the said goods; hence missing complaint was also filed. It is the case of the complainant that, the act of non delivery of the goods even after accepting the charges amounts to deficiency in service, hence the opponents are liable to pay compensation of Rs. 3,09,226/- i.e. value of goods, Rs. 1,00,000/- as a compensation for the loss of image and cost of the litigation.
2] The opponents resisted the complaint by filing written version. According to them, there is no deficiency in service at their hands. Pune District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. As per the terms and conditions between the parties, the complainants are not entitled for the compensation as alleged. The opponents have denied that, the complainant is entitled for compensation i.e. price of the goods as well as compensation on the ground of deficiency in service and cost of the litigation. They have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3] After scrutinizing the documentary evidence, which is produced before this Forum, hearing the arguments of both the counsels and considering pleadings, the following points arise for my determination. The points, findings and the reasons thereon are as follows-
Sr.No. | POINTS | FINDINGS |
1. | Whether complainant has proved that the opponents have caused deficiency in service? | In the affirmative. |
2. | Whether this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint? | In the affirmative. |
3. | What order? | Complaint is partly allowed. |
REASONS :-
4] The undisputed facts in the present proceeding are that, the complainant had booked courier services from the opponents for sending goods to its client Vardhaman Remedies Pvt. Ltd. by paying courier charges. This fact is not disputed by the opponents. As regards jurisdiction, it appears from the pleadings and evidence that the entire cause of action has arose within the jurisdiction of this Form, as the complainant has booked courier from Pune, the opponents have branch at Pune. Hence, this Forum has no hesitation to hold that it has jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
5] It reveals from the record that the complainant had booked courier services of the opponents for delivery of the goods and which was not reached at destination. In such circumstances, a legitimate inference can be drawn that the opponent is guilty of deficiency in service and they are bound to compensate the complainant by paying the value of the goods as well as compensation. On the basis of documentary evidence, the complainant had established that the opponent has lost the goods. One Mr. Mohan Devaji Siyani had lodged missing complaint in Samarth Police Station as regards missing of the said parcel. Vardhaman Remedies Pvt. Ltd. had sent letter to the complainant about non delivery of the goods worth of Rs.3,09,226/-, invoice of the said goods is produced on record. In such circumstances, it is the opinion of the Forum that, the complainant has established that the price of the goods, which was lost, was worth of Rs. 3,09,226/-. The complainant is entitled to receive price of the goods i.e. Rs. 3,09,226/- and also Rs. 1,010/- courier charges and compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for mental and physical sufferings and cost of the litigation. In the result, this Forum answer the points accordingly and pass the following order.
** O R D E R **
1. The complaint is partly allowed.
2. It is hereby declared that the opponents
have caused deficiency in service.
3. The opponents are directed to pay
price of the goods Rs. 3,09,226/- (Rs.
Three Lac Nine Thousand Two Hundred
and Twenty Six only), Courier charges of
Rs.1,010/- (Rs. One Thousand and Ten
only) and amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten
Thousand only) towards compensation for
mental and physical sufferings to the
complainant within six weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of this order.
2. On failure to pay abovementioned amount
within six weeks, the complainant is entitled
to receive interest @ 9% p.a. on the said
amount from the date of filing of the complaint
till its realization.
5. Copies of this order be furnished to
the parties free of cost.
6. Parties are directed to collect the sets,
which were provided for Members within
one month from the date of order, otherwise
those will be destroyed.
Place – Pune
Date- 23/04/2014
