Delhi

East Delhi

CC/1039/2014

JAI SHANKAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

ARYAWARTA PACKER - Opp.Party(s)

04 Oct 2016

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.    1039  / 2014

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                15/11/2014

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                04/10/2016

                                                                                                  Date of Order                         06/10/2016  

                                                                                                        

In matter of

 

Mr Jai Shankar Vishwakarma,  adult 

R/o Lajpat Nagar,

New Delhi  …………...…………………………….……..…………….Complainant

                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

 

Aryavrat Movers and Packer

D 121/8, First Floor South Ganesh Nagar,

Delhi 110092 ……………………………………………………………  Opponent

 

 

Complainant……………………………………In Person

Opponent ……....…………………………….. Ex Parte

 

 

Quorum         Sh Sukhdev Singh      President

                         Dr P N Tiwari               Member                                                                                                    

                         Mrs Harpreet Kaur    Member

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari  Member 

 

Brief Facts of the case                                    

Complainant booked some goods and cloths through OP for the destination to Kochi on dated 05/04/2014 and paid a sum of Rs 23200/- . It was assured by the OP that the goods would be delivered within 48 hours. Complainant reached at Kochi through flight and received the goods, but he was surprise as incomplete goods were delivered, so he contacted OP office and even visited personally at OP office, but did not get satisfactory reply. Due to deficient service of OP, complainant filed this complaint and annexed documents with this complaint.

Notice was served but neither OP put up its appearance nor submitted any brief or written statement or evidence on record. Number of opportunities were given, even though OP did not put their appearance, hence, OP was preceded Ex Parte. Complainant filed its evidence on affidavit which were on record.

Arguments were heard and order was reserved.

We have gone through all the facts and evidences on record and it was observed that complainant’s address was incomplete besides complainant had mentioned some goods and cloths. But seeing evidence filed by complainant as OP’s Car transportation charge invoice vide bill no. 1702 dated 05/04/2014 in the name of complainant. The other bill was of Four wheeler condition report in reference to car registration no. WB 40 N 6622 issued from Delhi office on dated 05/04/2014. This bill contains details of car with all the detail pertaining to engine no., chassis no. and all the accessories present in the car. This bill also endorsed with terms and conditions from A to G, specifically point E which reads as CAR IS BEING TARNSPORTED UNDER OWNER’S RISK, PARTY SHOULD COVER INSURANCE DIRECTLY. CARRIER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ACCIDENT/REPAIR ETC.

The third docket was annexed as a form of contract showing destination from Delhi to Kochi and carrying one used car not for sale and one bag with no detail given over it.

On scrutinizing the evidences available, it was clear that goods were booked by the complainant from Delhi to Kochi but there was no evidence whether goods received by complainant at Kochi were damaged or lost.

 

It was also observed that when and where the goods were received by complainant and what was the condition at the time of receiving the goods had no evidence. No such evidence was on record.

 

As OP was Ex Parte, and complainant had to file his evidences on affidavit, he could have annexed detail proof and evidences to prove OP’s deficiency and negligence in carrying the goods from Delhi to Kochi.

 

So, we come to the conclusion that this complaint has no merit and no concrete evidence to prove deficiency of OP, hence this complaint deserves dismissal, so the same is dismissed without any cost.

 

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the record room.

 

Mrs Harpreet Kaur                                                                                  (Dr) P N Tiwari

Member                                                                                                     Member                                                                                    

                                                 Shri Sukhdev Singh

                                                             President