DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANANTAPUR.
PRESENT: - Sri C.Thyagaraja Naidu, B.Sc., B.L., President
Smt.S.Lalitha, Member, M.A., M.L.,
Sri S.Niranjan Babu, B.A., B.L., Male Member
Monday, the 8th day of November, 2010
C.C.NO.105/2010
Between:
Imran Basha
S/o S.Lateef Saheb
Anantapur, now residing
at Bangalore. … Complainant
Vs.
1. The Manager
Bharat Motor Parcel Service
DCMS Compound
Kamalanagar
Anantapur.
- The Proprietor
Bharat Motor Parcel Service
Rajahmundry – 533 104. …. Opposite Parties
This case coming on this day for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri A.Suresh Kumar, advocate for the complainant and Sri B.Rajasekhar, advocate for the 1st opposite party and the 2nd opposite party is called absent and set-exparte and after perusing the material papers on record and after hearing the arguments of both sides, the Forum delivered the following:
O R D E R
Smt.S.Lalitha, Lady Member: - This complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties 1 & 2 to direct them to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards the value of the goods with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of booking i.e. 09-02-2009 till the date of payment, Rs.10,000/- towards negligent attitude of the opposite parties and costs of the complaint.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that: - The complainant is native of Anantapur and he was migrated to Bangalore and now residing at Bangalore. He came to Anantapur on his personal work in February,2009. In that course, he has purchased two bags of rice and booked the same in the 1st opposite party office at Anantapur to transport the same to K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore. The 2nd respondent is owner of the 1st opposite party. When the goods were booked by the complainant at Anantapur, the 1st opposite party collected Rs.134/- on 09-02-2009 and issued consignment copies to the complainant. It is submitted that since the date of booking of two bags of rice, the 1st opposite party did not deliver at K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore. On enquiries of the complainant, it is learnt that the goods were not received by K.R.Puram Branch office, Bangalore from Anantapur office. The complainant made several representations to the opposite parties over phone and in person, but the opposite parties never cared to in this regard to get the goods from Anantapur office or to trace out the goods of the complainant. Finally, on 22-05-2009 the complainant got issued notice to the opposite parties claiming damages of Rs.2,000/-. The 1st opposite party had issued reply notice on 15-06-2009 stating that two bags of rice are in Sulthanpet Office, Bangalore. On service of the reply notice, the complainant again approached Sulthanpet Office, Bangalore, but the concerned Sulthanpet Office, Bangalore staff informed that no such goods are available in the office. Hence, the complainant submits that the attitude of the opposite parties is clear negligence and deficiency of service on their part, which caused mental agony to the complainant. Hence, the complainant approached this Forum for redressal claiming Rs.2,000/- towards value of the goods with interest @ 18% p.a. and Rs.10,000/- towards deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
3. The 1st opposite party filed counter denying all the allegations made in the complaint except booking of two bags of rice by the complainant with the 1st opposite party. This opposite party submits that they have booked two bags of rice and transported the same to the Bangalore Transport Office. They alleged that the complainant never went to their Branch Office at Bangalore to collect the consignment. To their surprise, this opposite party has received legal notice from the complainant on 22-05-2009 for which they have given reply notice on 15-06-2009 asking the complainant to come and collect two bags of rice booked by him from the Bangalore Branch. Inspite of that the complainant did not claim the consignment. This opposite party further submits that the duty of this opposite party is to transport the goods booked to the place where they desire and not to their residence. The duty casts on the person to go and collect the same from their Branch. In the present case, the goods were already sent to Bangalore Branch and the complainant never went and collected the same. As per the consignee copy, the goods were booked from Anantapur to Bangalore and accordingly the goods were transported to Bangalore Branch. Hence, there is no negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the question of mental agony suffered by the complainant does not arise as there is no financial loss to the complainant. The complainant himself is neglected in not taking the goods from Bangalore Branch. Hence, the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. The 2nd opposite party remained exparte.
5. Basing on the above pleadings, the points that arise for consideration are:
1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties 1 &
2? If so whether the complainant is entitled for the amount as claimed in the
complaint from the opposite parties 1 & 2.
2. To what relief?
6. To prove the case of the complainant, the evidence on affidavit of the complainant has been filed and marked Ex.A1 to A3 documents. On behalf of the 1st opposite party, evidence on affidavit of 1st opposite party has been filed and no documents have been marked on behalf of the 1st opposite party.
7. Heard both sides.
8. POINT NO.1 – The contention of the complainant is that he has booked two bags of rice worth of Rs.2,000/- in the 1st opposite party office at Anantapur to K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore by paying Rs.134/- towards freight charges on 09-02-2009, but he did not receive the consignment from K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore. On enquiry the complainant learnt that the goods were not received by K.R.Puram Branch office, Bangalore from Anantapur office. The complainant made several representations to the opposite parties over phone and personally, but the opposite parties never responded for the same. Finally, on 22-05-2009 the complainant got issued notice to the opposite parties 1 & 2 claiming damages of Rs.2,000/-. On 15-06-2009 reply notice was received by the complainant from the 1st opposite party and in the said notice the 1st opposite party stated that two bags of rice is at Sulthanpet Office, Bangalore. Hence, the complainant went to Sulthanpet Office, Bangalore and enquired about the consignment, they replied that no such goods are available in their office. The attitude of the opposite parties caused mental agony to the complainant and he approached this Forum for redressal for the negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant is claiming Rs.2,000/- towards value of the goods with interest @ 18% p.a. and Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony.
9. The 1st opposite party denied that the complainant never claimed the consignment. It is not their duty to deliver the consignment at the residence of the complainant. After receiving notice from the complainant on 22-05-2009, the 1st opposite party gave reply notice to the complainant stating that the consignment is available at Sulthanpet, Bangalore office. Insptie of that the complainant did not claim the consignment. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on their part and no question of mental agony suffered by the complainant.
10. Here there is no dispute regarding booking of consignment i.e. two bags of rice by the complainant in the 1st opposite party office at Anantapur Branch to transport the same to K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore. Ex.A1 is consignee copy issued by the 1st opposite party Branch at Anantapur to the complainant. For that they charged Rs.134/- and the value of the consignment is mentioned as Rs.2,000/-. Here after enquiries the complainant came to know that the consignment has not reached at K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore, the complainant has issued notice on 22-05-2009 under Ex.A2 to the opposite parties 1 & 2 for which the 1st opposite party gave reply notice dt15-06-2009 under Ex.A3 stating that the consignment is in Sulthanpet Branch, Bangalore. The complainant approached Sulthanpet Branch, Bangalore and did not find the consignment in the said Branch. On perusal of this, it is true that the consignment did not reach K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore to which the complainant booked the consignment. As the consignment booked to be delivered at K.R.Puram Branch, Bangalore, the opposite parties should deliver the same in the said place. The opposite parties know that they have Branch office at K.R.Puram, Bangalore and charged Rs.134/- from the complainant. In the reply notice, it is mentioned that the complainant should go and collect the consignment at Sulthanpet Branch, Bangalore, but the complainant did not find the consignment in the said branch. The complainant took all efforts to collect the consignment by running from one branch to another branch, but he did not get delivery of the consignment from either of these branches. It is the duty of the opposite parties to deliver the goods at the Branch where the complainant booked the goods, but the opposite parties failed to do so. More-over after receipt of the notice from the complainant, they gave reply notice and stated that the goods were available in Sulthanpet Branch, Bangalore, but the complainant did not find the consignment there. The consumer is not supposed to go and collect the consignment wherever the opposite parties gave instructions. As the opposite parties did not deliver the consignment at K.R.Puram Banch, Bangalore and delayed till today, which amounts to negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and it caused mental agony to the complainant. The complainant is claiming the value of the goods worth of Rs.2,000/- with interest @ 18% p.a.. Here the complainant is entitled for the value of the goods of Rs.2,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of booking of the consignment i.e. 09-02-2009 till the date of realization. The complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and deficiency of service. But a sum of Rs.2,000/- is awarded towards mental agony.
11. POINT NO.2 – In the result the complaint is allowed and directed the opposite parties 1 & 2 jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards value of the goods with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of booking of consignment i.e. 09-02-2009 till the date of realization and to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards mental agony and costs of Rs.1,000/- within one month from the date of this order.
Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in open Forum, this the 8th day of November, 2010.
MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT: ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOISITE PARTIES
-NIL- - NIL-
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT
Ex.A1 - Consignee copy bearing no.0875350 dt.09-02-2009 issued by the 1st opposite
party in the name of the complainant.
Ex.A2 - Office copy of legal notice dt.22-05-2009 got issued by the complainant to the
opposite parties 1 & 2.
Ex.A3 - Reply notice dt.15-06-2009 got issued by the 1st opposite party to the counsel
for the complainant.
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES
MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR ANANTAPUR.
Typed by JPNN
