Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/452/2015

Sh. Dinesh Kumar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Aryawarta Packers and Movers - Opp.Party(s)

Varun Chawla

08 Feb 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/452/2015
Date of Institution	:	20/07/2015
Date of Decision	:	08/02/2017

 

Sh. Dinesh Kumar Singh, resident of House No.761, ATS Apartments, Derabassi (Mohali)

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

1.     Aryawarta Packers and Movers, Shop No.8, First Floor, D-121, Gautam Complex, South Ganesh Nagar, New Delhi-110092 through its Proprietor/Partner.

2.     Aryawarta Packers and Movers, D-101A/1, Ground Floor, Street No.4, South Ganesh Nagar, Delhi-92, through its Manager. [Deleted vide order dated 8.9.2016].

3.     Aryawarta Packers and Movers, Rajan Plaza, Near Big Bazar, Zirakpur, through Sh. Arvind. [Deleted vide order dated 7.2.2017].

……Opposite Parties

CORAM :	S.S. PANESAR	PRESIDENT
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Varun Chawla, Counsel for complainant
	:	OP-1 exparte
	:	OPs 2 & 3 deleted.

Per S.S. Panesar, President

1.         The facts, in brief, are that the complainant approached the OPs for transporting his household goods from Derabassi to New Delhi on 27.6.2014. The OPs guaranteed and assured the complainant that they will take utmost care in packing and transporting the household goods. On the advice of the OPs, the complainant agreed for insuring the household goods. The OPs charged an amount of Rs.19,900/- for transportation/ Packing/Loading/Unloading charges excluding service tax. The OPs obtained the insurance cover for the consignment and charged a sum of Rs.9,000/- from the complainant as insurance charges.  In total an amount of Rs.31,660/- was charged from the complainant vide invoice (Annexure C-1). The OPs, despite requests, did not supply the complete copy of the insurance policy to the complainant which he ultimately obtained from the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. When the complainant went through the contents of the insurance policy, he was astonished that the consignment was insured for the sum assured/amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. The total premium charged was mentioned as Rs.3,448/- and not Rs.9,000/- as charged by the OPs from him.  OPs were approached with a request to refund the excess amount i.e. Rs.9,000 – Rs.3,448/- = Rs.5,502/-, but, to no avail.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, the complainant has instituted the present complaint. 
2.         OP-1 did not appear despite due service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 8.9.2015.
3.         In view of the endorsement made by the counsel for the complainant on the order sheet, the name of OP-2 was deleted from the array of OPs vide order dated 8.9.2016.
4.         In view of the endorsement made by the counsel for the complainant on the order sheet, the name of OP-3 was deleted from the array of OPs vide order dated 7.2.2017.
5.         The complainant led evidence in support of his contentions. 
6.         We have gone through the record and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the complainant.
7.         The evidence adduced by the complainant in support of his case has gone unrebutted on record.  OP-1 intentionally suffered ex-parte despite due service and thereby impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint.  From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that the complainant availed the services of OP-1 for transporting his goods from Derabassi to New Delhi on 27.6.2014 on payment of a sum of Rs.19,990/- as fare. OP-1 charged Rs.31,660/- in all as transportation, insurance premium/ packing/loading/unloading and service tax besides D.K.T charge vide invoice, copy whereof is Annexure C-2. OP-1 had agreed to charge the actual insurance premium only, but, however, it did not supply the complete insurance certificate, copy whereof has been enclosed as Annexure
   C-3, wherein premium amount does not find mention.  The complainant himself got the copy of complete insurance certificate, copy whereof is Annexure C-4 and a perusal whereof shows that the insurance company had charged insurance premium to the tune of Rs.3,448/- only whereas OP-1 had charged an amount of Rs.9,000/- on that account from the complainant and as such the OP is not only deficient in service, but, is also guilty of indulging in unfair trade practice. The OP had no right or authority to charge any amount in excess of the premium actually payable.  Thus, it becomes amply clear that OP-1 has charged Rs.5,552/- in excess on the pretext of insurance premium which OP-1 is under legal obligation to refund to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled to compensation on account of mental pain and physical inconvenience on account of deficient services of OP-1.
8.         On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the instant complaint succeeds ex-parte and the same is partly allowed qua OP-1. OP-1 is directed as under :-

(i)     To refund to the complainant the amount of Rs.5,552/- overcharged by it on account of insurance premium.

(ii)    To pay to the complainant Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony, physical pain and inconvenience caused to him on account of the deficient services;

(iii)   To pay to the complainant Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation. 

9.         This order be complied with by OP-1 within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
10.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

 

	Sd/-	Sd/-
08/02/2017	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[S.S. Panesar]
hg	Member	President