BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

FORUM, VELLORE DISTRICT AT VELLORE.

PRESENT:   THIRU. A. SAMPATH, B.A., B.L.,                PRESIDENT       

                                          TMT. G. MALARVIZHI, B.E.                              MEMBER – I

                                      THIRU. K. DHAYALAMURTHI,B.SC.    MEMBER – II

CC. 17 / 2002

MONDAY THE 27^th DAY OF SEPTEMEBR 2010.                               

Ramanathan,

Proprietor,

Kalavaniremedies,

No.272-A, I floor,

Vivekanandar Street-II,

Phase III,

Sathuvachari,

TNHB,

Vellore 632 009.                                                                               …  Complainant.

       - Vs –

M/s. Transport Corporation of India,

Branch at Vellore

By its Branch Manager,

31 Bye Pass Road,.

Vellore 632 004.                                                                          … Opposite party.

. . . .    

              This petition coming on for final hearing before us on 15.9.2010, in the presence of Thiru. T.L.Narayanan, Advocate for the complainant and Thiru. S. Prakesh, Advocate for the  opposite party, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Forum made the following:

O R D E R

            Pronounced by Thiru. A. Sampath, President of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Vellore District.

1.         The brief facts of the case of the complainant is as follows:   

            The complainant is a self-employed trade being the proprietor of Kalaivani remedies located at his residence itself, engaged in procuring drugs, medical appliances such as syringes, IV Fluids, Salines bottles, and allied products from manufacturers and supplying to Drugstores, hospitals and doctors.   The complainant placed an order for consignment of 500 boxes of drug Abgel from Sri Gopalakrishna Labs-Mumbai of the value of Rs.24,752/-.  Who sent the same through the opposite party from Sakinaka to Vellore on 23.6.01 itself.  The bill raised by the manufacturer and the consignment note 01131 CF 57301 are filed herewith.   As soon as the complainant received the advice from the supplier and anticipating the arrival and delivery, he had also intimated the valued customers, who were eagerly awaiting the delivery.  The complainant also raised the monies and cleared the Lorry receipt through the bank, waiting for the arrival of the goods which in normal admitted transit time, must have been delivered atleast on the 11^th day.  But the goods did not arrive as assured and anticipated.  The complainant was shocked to learn from the opposite party that the goods had indeed arrived but later, but were stolen form the godown of the opposite party at Vellore on the midnight of 3.8.01.  The complainant therefore did not take delivery of the consignment, which were stolen by the negligence and carelessness of the opposite party who failed to take appropriate care and protection for the goods, being grossly deficient in service.  The liability of the opposite party is that of the carrier i.e. that of a bailee, who is bound to reimburse the complainant for the value of the goods i.e. Rs.24,752/-.  The opposite party had also issued the certificate of loss which is filed herewith.   The consignor has also certified that there was no insurance, which also is filed herewith.     There was no followup or settlement by the opposite party, which forced the complainant to write the letter on 27.9.01.   Thereafter the complainant  issued a notice of demand through counsel on 18.3.02 not only to the opposite party, but also to the registered office, Corporate office and  Regional office.  The opposite party, corporate office, and the registered office received the notice, but filed to reply or comply with.  The Pondichery Regional office evaded the notice which was returned.  The complainant therefore lost the goods-after payment, and the sum of rS.24,752/- with bank charges, and interest at 24% pa. is bound to be reimburse paid by the opposite party to the complainant atleast from the date of theft i.e. 3.8.01 till date of full and final payment.    Due to the gross deficiency of service of the opposite party in not delivering the consignment the complainant suffered loss of custom, loss of goodwill and reputation and future orders have been denied, resulting in monetary loss also.  The complainant is undergoing severe mental agony, distress and physical torture.   Therefore the opposite party is to be directed to pay a sum of  Rs.24,752/- with interest at 24% p.a. from 3.8.01 till date of full and final payment and to pay a sum of  Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the gross deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by not delivering the goods-or-pay the value and not even replying and Rs.750 being the costs of notice the sum of Rs.1250/- spent on contacting the opposite party and various other offices, inperson through post and through telephone and Rs.4000/- as costs of this complaint. 

2.         The averments in the counter filed by the  opposite party is as follows:

            The opposite party does not admit any of the allegations in the complaint to be true save those that are specifically admitted herein.  The complainant is put to strict proof of each and every allegations made in his complaint.   The allegations that due to the gross deficiency of the opposite party in not delivering the consignment the complainant suffered loss of customer, good will reputation, future orders resulting in monetary loss and that he is undergoing severe mental agony distress and physical torture are all equally false and baseless.     It is true that on 23.6.01 the complainant ordered a consignment of drugs with M/s. Gopal Krishnan Labs, Bombay, allegedly value at Rs.24,752/- to be delivered at Vellore through the opposite party Transport Company as per consignment note No.JC 01131 paying freight charges of Rs.361/-.  The complainant did not arrange to insure the consignment and it was booked at owner’s risk.  The consignment reached Vellore in right time on 4.7.01.  The arrival of the consignment was informed to the complainant by the Branch Supervisor over telephone and post card.  Inspite of such prompt arrival and information the complainant did not take delivery of the goods.  The complainant delayed taking delivery since he was unable to pay the amount to the bank.  The consignee bank is Union Bank of India, Mundy Street, Vellore.  There was a theft in their Vellore godown in the midnight of 3.8.01.  Inspite of strict vigil and safety measures the theft had occurred.  The opposite party also lodged a complaint with the Vellore North Crime police regarding the theft

5.         Now the points for consideration are:

a)  Whether there is any deficiency in service, on 

                 the part of the opposite parties?

            b)  Whether the complainants are entitled to the

                reliefs asked for?.

6.         Ex.A1 to ExA9 were marked on the side of the complainants and Ex.B1 was marked on the side of the opposite parties.  Proof affidavit of the complainant and Proof affidavit of the opposite parties have been filed.  No oral evidence let in by either side. 

7.         POINT NO. (a):

            The complainants contended that they reserved two seats at the point to point in Chennai bound express on 1.2.2002 at the Vellore Bus stand for them for the journey on 3.2.02 at 5.a.m bus.  At that time Rs.10/- for two seats was collected for reserving two seats.  The registrations Nos. are 83515 & 83616.  The seats allotted were 27 and 28.  The route No. was 102.  On 3.2.02 the complainants got into the bus at 4.45 a.m.   The bus left 5.05 a.m.  The conductor issued the tickets bearing No.39777 and 39778 and collected the fare of Rs.92/- for two tickets. (Rs.46/- each).   Thereafter, the complainants returned to Vellore from Chennai boarding 2.10 p.m. bus at the moffusil bus stand  at Broadway on the same day i.e. 3.2.2002.  when the complainants occupied their seats in the bus No.TN23N1349, the fare was collected at Rs.40.50 and tickets were issued N1349.  The bus left the stand at 2.20 p.m.  On the way, the bus which was supposed to stop only at Poonamallee for taking passengers only if there were vant seats, allowed the passengers to get into the bus and allowed them to stay in other places and accommodated stating passengers also.   The bus stopped at Walaja and some more passengers got into it.  The bus reached Vellore at 5.46 p.m.  when the usual time was 4.45. p.m.   Therefore, the opposite parties committed deficiency in service to the complainant.      

8.         The opposite parties contended that the complainants were not inconvenience in the bus but the complainants have admitted that they have occupied seats and completed the journey.    The complainants have a reasonably comfortable travel as is evident from the factum of their completion of journey.  Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

9.         From the perusal of Ex.A1 & Ex.A2 seat priority tokens issued by the 1^st opposite party it is mentioned that the date of travel on 3.2.02, departure time 5.00 and charge for Rs.5/- collected by the 1^st opposite party for seat priority.   Ex.A3 & Ex.A4 bus tickets from Vellore to Chennai, Ex.A5 & Ex.A6, bus tickets from Chennai to Vellore issued by the 1^st opposite party.  The contention of the complainants that the point to point bus is excepted to stop only in particulars places and not in places where the conductors wants and to reach Chennai in time.  According to the 1^st opposite party that the point to point bus is subjected to some stops from Vellore to Chennai route and it did not stop anywhere else.   Based on the Ex.A1 seat priority tokens, the complainants were occupied the seats No.83615 and 83616 and completed his travel from Vellore to Chennai and from Chennai to Vellore on 3.2.02.   The opposite party admitted that some standing passengers were allowed to travel upto Madras and in such cases sitting passengers are not made any inconvenience at any point of time.  According to the 1^st opposite party that now a days passengers are obliged to pay the point to point bus fair by standing travel upto Madras and being the public utility service, the requirements of the passengers are also essential in order to run the bus at Madras route.  In such cases sitting passengers are not made any inconvenience at any point of time   From the perusal of the proof affidavit of both sides it is clear that the complainant has not suffered any inconvenience caused to the complainant during his travel from Vellore to Chennai and from Chennai to Vellore. 

10.       Regarding the increase of reservation charge the 1^st opposite party contended that  based on the Government Policy the hiking of reservation charge under G.O.Ms.No.1177, dt. 29.11.01 and G.O.Ms.No.1204 dt. 5.12.01 accordingly the 1^st  opposite party implemented the order of the Government about the increase of reservation charge.  Based on the Government order the 1^st opposite party has increased the reservation charge.    Therefore the complainant cannot challenge the increase of reservation charge of Rs.5/- before this Forum.

11.       Hence, taking all the above facts into consideration from the contention in the  complaint and the counter, as well as proof affidavit of the both the parties, and from the documents Ex.A1 to A9, and Ex.B1, we have come to the conclusion that the complainants herein have not clearly proved the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties herein.  Hence we answer this point (a) as against the complainants herein.

12.       POINT NO : (b)

            In view of our findings on point (a), since, we have come to the conclusion that the complainants herein have not clearly proved the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties herein.   We have also come to the conclusion that the complainants are not at all entitled to any relief asked for by them, in this complaint.  Hence we answer this point (b) also as against the complainant herein.

13.                   In the result this complaint is dismissed.  No costs.

Dictated to the Steno-typist and transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by the President, in Open Forum, this the 27^th day of September  2010.

MEMBER-I                               MEMBER-II                                                        PRESIDENT.

List of Documents:

Complainant’s Exhibits:

Ex.A1 & -  1.2.02      - X-copy of the receipt for reservation tickets issued by the

Ex.A2                           1^st opposite party for Rs.5/-

Ex.A3 & -  3.2.02      - X-copy of two tickets from Vellore to Chennai.

Ex.A4

Ex.A5 & -  3.2.02      - X-copy of two tickets from Chennai to Vellore.

Ex.A6.

Ex.A7    - 15.2.02      - X-copy of registered notice issued by the complainant to

                                    The opposite parties.

Ex.A8    - 6.2.02        -  Ack. Card.

Ex.A9.   -15.2.02       - Receipt for Rs.24/-

Opposite parties’ Exhibits:

Ex.B1- 5.12.01         - X-copy of Government Order.

MEMBER-I                               MEMBER-II                                                     PRESIDENT.