Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/27/2015

Sila Shiba Prasad - Complainant(s)

Versus

D.T.D.C. Courier and Cargo Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri P.K. Mishra

22 Jun 2022

ORDER

1. The case of the Complainant is that he is the proprietor of M/S Siba Medical Agencies, Sambalpur despatch medicines to different locations of the country through opposite party courier and cargo service. The O.P. No.1 is a registered Company and the O.P. No.2 is one of the Branch in the country. The Complainant has booked consignment of important life saving drugs which had specified expiring date and the O.P. No. 2 has received the consignment for delivery.

The Complainant has submitted a table mentioning the documents no booking date, consignee, Address, No. of case, claim No. Amount and delivery status. Forum 09.10.2013 to 28.08.2014, total 19 consignment medicines amounting to Rs. 2, 97,043/- has not reached to its destination.

The Complainant in table-2 reflected the medicines amounting to Rs. 1, 80,934/- which were consigned from 25.03.2014 to 03.09.2014(5 consignments) delivered but after long lapse of time 9 months, 6 months, 4 months etc. which is extra ordinary delayed time. The O.P. No.2 acknowledge the consignment dated 19.08.2014 and 23.06.2014 in table-I but not issued any slips.

The Complainant alleged further that till date the consignment of table-1 has not been delivered. Due to delayed delivery of medicines the complainant is debarred to get the reimbursement price.

The Complainant made several correspondences to O.P. NO.2, requested for early delivery but he did not pay any heed. The Complainant sustained financial loss of Rs. 4, 77,977/- and claimed for the amount.

                    The table of claim is given here under:

Table No.1:-

Doc No.	Booking date	Consignee	Address	No. Of cases	Claim No.	Amount	Delivery Status
D17340241	15.03.2014	Aglowmed Ltd.	Cuttack	1	RC00205	3249	Not delivered
D17597926	17.03.2014	Alkem	Cuttack	1	RC00240	18822	Not delivered
D18142758	29.05.2014	Alkem	Cuttack	1	RC00036	18183	Not delivered
D17341608	02.04.2014	Cadila Pharma	Bhubaneswar	1	RC00262+279	1115	Not delivered
D17597913	30.04.2014	Cipl Ltd.	Cuttack	1	RC00013	35817	Not delivered
D17597929	16.04.2014	Dr. Reddys	Cuttack	1	RC0003	934	Not delivered
D16573027	11.03.2014	Glaxo	Cuttack	1	RC00200	14570	Not delivered
D17340780	31.03.2014	Glaxo	Cuttack	1	RC00273	1699	Not delivered
D17597925	17.03.2014	Glaxo	Cuttack	1	RC00004	2910	Not delivered
D17340798	31.03.2014	Jagsonpal	Cuttack	1	RC00237+258	1912	Not delivered
D18142782	27.08.2014	Macleados	Cuttack	1	RC00059	24415	Not delivered
D17340756	30.04.2014	Raptakos	Cuttack	1	RC00006	2759	Not delivered
D14973748	09.10.2013	Aristo	Cuttack	1	RC00064	27333	Not delivered
D17340833	20.05.2014	Mankind Pharma	Cuttack	1	RC00010	26673	Not delivered
D18142803	28.08.2014	Modi Pharma	Cuttack	1	RC00064	13730	Not delivered
D12028329	19.01.2013	Modi Pharma	Cuttack	1	RC00178	12447	Not delivered
D17597917	24.05.2014	U.S.V. Ltd	Cuttack	2	RC00017	31725	Not delivered
*	19.08.2014	Zuventus	Cuttack	1	RC00048	39708	Not delivered
*	23.06.2014	Veritaz	Cuttack	1	RC00026	10212	Not delivered
					Total	297043

 

Table No.2:-

Doc No.	Booking date	Consignee	Address	No. Of cases	Claim No.	Amount	Delivery Status
D17341631	25.03.2014	Dr. Redddys	Cuttack	1	RC00224+236	52436	Delivered on 02.01.2015
D18142760	23.06.2014	Dr. Redddys	Cuttack	1	RC00037	15238	Delivered on 10.12.2014
D17782557	19.08.2014	Glaxo	Cuttack	1	RC00052	17203	Delivered on 19.12.2014
D17782560	03.09.2014	Nutricia	Cuttack	1	RC00096	8830	Delivered on 10.01.2015
D17341616	28.03.2014	Torrent	Cuttack	2	RC00239	96057	Delivered on Dec, 2014
					Total	180934

 

2. The case of the answering O.P. No.2 is that the case is not maintainable. The O.P. No.2 said that after receipt of the complaint, the same has been intimated to the Regional office for settlement of the dispute. Al the allegation of the Complaint are false and fabricated. The Complaint is liable to dismissed.
3. The O.P. NO.1 after appearance filed its show-cause and simply said that the case is not maintainable. The consignments have been delivered, the complainant claims the compensation. The consignments are expired medicines and the same has been delivered at the destination. The claim is false and fabricated. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. After perusal of the complaint, version of the O.Ps and documents filed by the Complainant the following issues are framed:

103606587. Issues

1. Whether the Complaint cosigned the medicines through the O.Ps as per table 1 & 2 in the Complaint?
2. What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

ISSUE NO.1;- Whether the Complaint cosigned the medicines through the O.Ps as per table 1 & 2 in the Complaint?

From verification of documents filed by the Complainant is reveals that through different consignments in different dates the Complainant consigned the materials to the desired destination and in-support the O.P. No.2 granted receipt to the Complainant. Further from the return challan filed by the Complainant it reveals that as per table-1 and table -2 the details of the medicines consigned have been reflected. The return challans reflect the date of expiry of the medicines. The samples taken for examination are given below:-

Doc. No. 17341631 dated 25.03.2014 was granted by O.P. No.2 and the return challan reflect the dates of expiry as 01/2014, 03/2014, 11/2013, 10/2013, 01/2014, etc, the delivery date of medicines is not supported with any documents.

Doc. No. D17782560 dated 03.09.2014 was granted by O.P. No.2 and the rerun challan reflect the dates of expiry as 01/2015, 02/2015, 01/2015 etc. the delivery date of medicines is not supported with any documents.

From the above documents it reveals that the medicines are almost expired medicines or during the last moment of expiry.

Accordingly, as it is admitted by the Complainant the table-2 medicines are already delivered the only question of delay in delivery is an important point of determination of deficiency in service of O.Ps.

The Complainant alleged that the table-1 medicines are not delivered in the destination. The O.Ps failed to provide any documentary evidence regarding the delivery of the goods. Accordingly adverse inference can be drawn against the O.Ps.

The Complainants made complaints before the O.P. No.2 on 15.12.2014 and 26.02.2015. The reply of the O.P. No.2 dated 06.02.2015 says that due to unavoidable reason reply could not be given. In reply dated 25.03.2015 the O.P. No.2 said they do not preserve POD/DRS more than 3 months. He begged apology and said the issue is with internal vigilance team to settle. Further the O.P. No.2 said that if the Complainant is feeling unnecessary delay to get speedy result to go to the Consumer Forum. The reply clearly shows the harassing attitude of O.P. No.2 and the deficiency in service of the O.P. No.2. The Complainant compelled to file this complaint after the reply supra dated 25.03.2015, on 05.04.2015.

The issue is answered accordingly.

ISSUE NO.2:- What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

          From the documents filed by the Complainant it reveals that the table-1 medicines are not delivered in desired destination and the table-2 medicines although delivered not in time. It amounts to deficiency in service of the O.Ps. Accordingly it is ordered:      

ORDER

          The Complaint is allowed on contest. The O.Ps are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 2,97,043.00 to-wards cost of the medicines shown in table-1 for delay in delivery of medicines in table-2 Rs. 50,000/- and to-wards litigation expense Rs. 10,000/-. The entire amount will carry 4% interest P.A. from the day of filing the complaint. In case the O.Ps failed to pay the amount within 30 days, the amount will carry 12% P.A. till realisation.

 

          Order pronounced in open court on this 22^nd day of June-2022.

          Supply free copies to the parties.