Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/70/2016

Payal Gulati - Complainant(s)

Versus

Courier and Cargo Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Gagandeep Singh Cheema Adv.

12 Dec 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.

:

70/2016

Date of Institution

:

29.01.2016

Date of Decision    

:

12.12.2016

 

                                       

Payal Gulati w/o Sh.Sahil Gulati r/o H.No.2309, Sector 38-D,Chandigarh through her SPA Subham Gulati s/o Sh.Subhash Gulati r/o H.No.2309, Sector 38-C, Chandigarh

                                ...  Complainant.

Versus

1.       Kuber Enterprises, Booth No.21, Sector 38-C, Chandigarh

 

2.     M/s On Dot Courier and Cargo Ltd. through its Managing Director, 8/42, Kirti Nagar, Industrial Area, New Delhi-110015.

…. Opposite Parties.

 

BEFORE:    SHRI RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

SHRI RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

Argued by:

Sh.Inderpreet, Proxy Advocate for Sh.G.S.Cheema, Adv. for the complainant.

Sh.Sikander Bakshi, Adv. for the OPs (OP No.1 exparte).  

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

  1.         In brief, the case, as alleged by the complainant is that OP No.1 is doing the business of courier service and OP No.2 is the Head Office of OP No.1.  It has been averred that she sent a courier parcel containing the tourist visa papers vide courier receipt dated 24.10.2015  and the said parcel was assured to be delivered within 2-3 days.   She checked the status of the delivery at the site of OP No.2 but the same was not delivered and as such she approached OP No.1 which put off the matter on one pretext or the other.  According to the complainant, the said parcel was delivered to the consignee on 05.11.2015 and due to delay in delivery of courier, she suffered mental agony, loss of earning etc.  It has been alleged that due to the aforesaid act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant and her husband could not visit the abroad together well within time.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
  2.         Notice sent for the service of Opposite Party No.1 was received back with the report of refusal. Since refusal was good service, and none appeared on behalf its behalf on the date fixed, therefore vide order dated 12.04.2016, it was proceeded against exparte. 
  3.         In its written statement, OP No.2 admitted that the complainant had booked the parcel on 24.10.2015. However, it has been pleaded that the contents regarding the parcel containing the tourist visa were not declared at the time of booking the parcel.  Besides this, the complainant has failed to get his consignment insured by paying an extra amount towards the insurance premium. It has further been pleaded that the complainant booked the parcel on 24.10.2015 (Saturday) and due to festive holidays season there was over burden of work, short of staff, as on 27.10.2015 it was Maharishi Balmiki Jayanti Holiday and 30.10.2015 was Karwachuth. The packet was processed by Mr.Nabha Singh on 30.10.2015 and 31.10.2015 & 01.11.2015 were Saturday and Sunday and the Embassy where the packet was to be delivered was closed.  Thereafter, the packet was attempted on 2nd November. However, the packet was refused to be taken as it was torn. It has further been pleaded that the staff of the OPs holds the packet in their office and informed South Hub and Punjab Circle and on 5th November, they received telephonic instructions from Punjab Circle to change the envelop and deliver the packet and as such the same was delivered on 05.11.2015 and the complainant was informed accordingly.  It has been denied that the complainant has suffered any mental harassment and loss of earning.  Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on its part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
  4.         We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents on record.
  5.         Admittedly, the complainant had hired the services of the OPs for the delivery of the parcel in question at the Visa Office, New  Delhi on 24.10.2015 and the same was delivered to the consignee by the OPs on 05.11.2015 i.e. after about 11 days from the date of its booking. The lame excuse, taken by OP No.2 in its written statement that the same could not be delivered to the consignee in time due to heavy burden and public holidays on account of festive season, is a no ground in the eyes of law and the same is rejected accordingly.   In our considered view, once the OPs booked the parcel in question then it was their contractual duty to deliver the same within the agreed time. Otherwise also, 26th, 28th and 29th November, 2015 were the working days and the parcel in question could have very easily been delivered to the consignee. Thus, the OPs were negligent in performing their contractual duties which amounts to deficiency in service on their part.
  6.         However, from the receipt (Annexure C-1), it is apparent that the contents of the packet were not disclosed by the complainant at the time of handing over the same to the OPs. In these circumstances, from the bald and self-serving deposition of the complainant, it is not proved that the parcel containing the tourist visa papers were sent through courier. However, the fact remains that due to late delivery of the parcel in question to the consignee, the complainant has certainly suffered mental agony and physical harassment and as such she requires to be compensated on this ground only.
  7.         Keeping in view overall facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the complaint with a direction to the OPs to pay a lump sum compensation of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant.  This order be complied with by the Opposite Parties, within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the awarded amount shall carry interest @9% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment.
  8.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

12/12/2016

Sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.