Delhi

North

CC/18/2018

JAIN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

D.T.D.C. COURIER PVT. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

VAIBHAV SHARMA

16 Jan 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex, Delhi- 110054

 

Consumer Complaint No.:18/2018

 

In the matter of

Jain Cooperative Bank Pvt. Ltd.

Through its CEO

80, Darya Ganj,

Delhi-110002.                                     …                                   Complainant

                                                          Vs

DTDC Courier Pvt. Ltd.

Through its CEO

79, Darya Ganj,

Delhi-110002.                                     …                                    Opposite Party

ORDER

16/01/24

 

Ashwani Kumar Mehta, Member:

 

(1)      The facts of the Complaint in hand, are that the OP had sent an offer for couriers and cargo services for delivery of its AGM Books to members for the AGM of the complainant Bank scheduled to be held on 2/7/2017, to the complainant which was duly accepted and the Complainant handed over 30,258 books to the OP on 17/6/2017 for the delivery within seven days as per the offer given by OP and accepted by the complainant. Copy of the same is annexed with the complaint and marked as Annexure-B.

 

(2)      It has been alleged that when the Complainant had handed over the AGM Books for delivery to its members, the OP had represented to the Complainant that the OP Company's provide the best services worldwide and all the books will be delivered latest by 24/6/2017 but on 25/6/2017, the Complainant through its representative contacted the OP and informed them that no books have been delivered yet for which the OP replied that the same are on track and asked the complainant bank to go to Shahdara office of the OP.  Thereafter, the complainant approached the OP’s office at Shahdara but the OP’s officials at Shahdara office kept on avoiding the complainant on one pretext or the other for the reasons best known to it.  However, in order to maintain cordial relations with the OP, the complainant did not take any action and relied upon the assurance  given by the OP that the AGM Books are on track and the same would be delivered soon. Therefore, believing the OP, the Complainant had sent a mail to OP seeking response where upon the OP had sent a mail showing 158 Books delivered. The complainant bank, thereafter, regularly was in touch with the OP and had also written to it about timely delivery of the books. The correspondence exchanged between the complainant and the OP is annexed with the complaint as Annexure -C. colly

(3)      Thereafter the Complainant Bank Cross checked with its member as to whether the AGM books have been received or not, and whosoever was contacted, denied of receiving the AGM Book or anything from the complainant bank. In fact,  the tracking status as given by the OP of delivered articles were also cross checked wherein it was confirmed by the members that they have not received any AGM book. Moreover, the complainant bank had also contacted the Chairman of the bank who was also among those 158 members (who were delivered couriers as per tracking report given by the OP), did not receive any AGM book from the OP. Upon this, the complainant immediately inform the OP accordingly, and sought explanation and tracking record as the AGM Meeting was scheduled on 2/7/2017, but the OP refused to provide to same. It is further stated by the complainant that the complainant was in fact left running from pillar to post for the response of the OP and the OP  ignored the complainant on one pretext or the other believing that as the AGM scheduled in 2/7/2017  and the complainant being a financial institution, would not keep any track. The OP has not delivered any of the AGM Books as agreed upon. The Complainant had several times contacted the OP and even at its Shahdara office for the tracking the delivery sweveral times, however, there was no response from their side. Rather,  the Complainant was being harassed/ ignored by the OP on one pretext or the other. The complainant Bank has  suffered a lot of harassment, agony, torture prior to the filing of the present complaint and have also suffered a huge amount of loss and further due to the acts of the OP. The Complainant Bank, as per the facts mentioned above, has filed the instant Complaint praying for directions to the OP to pay:-

1.	Compensation for not fulfilling the contract and delivering the AGM Books, physical and mental harassment, agony torture by the OP.	Rs.5,00,000/-.
2.	Expenses incurred by the complainant bank official.	Rs.5,000/-.
3.	Amount of Rs.2,50,000/- claimed by the Complainant along with interest @ 24% p.a. as being the cost of the AGM books printing and also the advance paid thereto.	Rs.2,50,000/-
Total:-		Rs.7,55,000/- (alongwith interest)

 

It has also been prayed to pass such other or further order(s) as may be deemed fit and facts in proper circumstances of the present case.

(4)      The complainant has filed copies of Offer Letter from DTDC dated 14.06.2017, e-mail communication between the Bank & DTDC and  receipts of OP in  respect to Agenda books handed over by complainant and  office order issued by the Bank.

(5)      Accordingly, notice was issued to the OP after considering that the complaint falls within the ambit of this commission as consumer dispute and in response, the OP has filed its reply contesting  that:-

i.       the present complaint is not maintainable as the services hired by the complainant was for commercial purpose as per the complaint.

ii.      the present case does not fall under the ambit of the consumer protection act as the complainant is claiming the damages and recovery of alleged cost of AGM books which can be determine only by the civil suit and complainant has filed the present complaint to save the court fee knowing well that he has no case.

iii.     the present complaint is not maintainable as the value of the consignment were not declared at the time of booking of the consignment and consignments were not insured.

iv.      the contents of para b of the complaint are admitted. The OP is one of the best courier company. The books were supplied on 19/6/2017 as against 17/6/2017 and  addresses were not mentioned which was also undertaken by the OP though it was not the obligation on the part of the OP but to give best of services to the complainant, the OP to help out the complainant at last moment engaged its employees to mention the addresses of consignees on each envelope which took lot of time and men power and energy of the OP and the OP delivered maximum consignment in time much prior to AGM of the complainant.

v.       the contents of Para no. f of the complaint are wrong and denied. As per the records, 19489 consignments were delivered. The field staff of the OP thereafter went to return the remaining consignment but the official of the bank did not gave any receipt and kept the bag withthout receiving.

vi.      it is denied that the OP refused to provide the proof of service/MIS. As per the records 19489 were delivered or RTO and MIS to this effect has been send to the complainant through Mail.

viii.    the contents of para h of the complaint  are false, frivolous, wrong and denied. It is denied that the OP were just trying to ignore the complainant on one pretext of the other believing that the complainant is financial institution, they would not keep any track since AGM is on 2/7/2017.

ix.      the contents of para no. i of the complaint are false, frivolous, wrong and denied. After receiving the books, the OP diligently tried to deliver the consignment. As a matter of fact that complainant after availing the services of the OP refused to pay the charges and with malafide intentions has filed the present complaint which is liable to be dismissed. Copies of the bills issued against the booking are filed in the CD attached with the reply.

 x.      the contents of para no: j are false, frivolous, wrong and denied .

 

The MIS of the consignments was duly sent to the complainant on 01/07/2017 through Email and it is the complainant who is running away from its liability to pay the charges to the OP.

xi.      the claim of the complainant is false frivolous and without any basis and is liable to be dismissed. It is denied that the complainant is entitled for Rupees 5,00,000/- for not fulfilling contract and not delivering AGM books, physical and mental harassment, agony and alleged torture by the OP. It is denied that the complainant is entailed for Rs. 5000/ towards the alleged expenses incurred by its officials, it is denied that the complainant is entitled for Rs. 2, 50,000/- the cost of alleged AGM books. Thee OP took due care and cautions and delivered maximum number of Books and the books which were not delivered for the reasons mention in MIS were returned to the bank, therefore, the complainant is not entitled for any amount much more or less as prayed.

(6)      The OP has filed copies of board resolution in favour of Ms. Nidhi Mehta, print out of the email dated 01.07.2017 sent by OP to Complainant, CD of the MIS taken from the attachment of email dated 01.07.2017 claiming that bills issued against the consignment are in the CD in which MIS is copied and certificate u/s 65 B.

(7)      The Complainant has not filed rejoinder, however, both the parties have filed evidences and written arguments affirming their averments.

(8)      Accordingly, the complaint has been examined in view of the facts of the case and averments/documents/Evidence put forth by the parties and it has been observed that:-

1. The OP has contended that the Complainant is not a consumer as per the Provisions of CP Act 1986 and the Complainant also does not fall under the jurisdiction of this Commission as the dispute in question pertains to a commercial transaction. In this regard, it is clarified that this issue has already been examined and the services hired by the  Complainant  Bank from OP are not of commercial nature because it has not been availed for earning profit. The judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal NO(s).5352-­5353 OF 2007 in the matter of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs  Harsolia Motors & Ors.is relevant in the matter.
2. The offer for courier service has been given by the OP to complainant ensuring delivery of total shipment within maximum period of  7 days from the day of its receipt by the OP and courier charges has also been quoted as Rs.13.08 P (inclusive of taxes) per article for delivering 30456 articles below 250 gm each.
3. The Complainant has also filed proof of delivery/handing over of 30258 copies of AGM books to the OP on 17.06.2017 whereas the OP is contesting that these articles were delivered to it on 19.06.2017 without any documentary/corroborative evidence.
4. The Complainant vide letter dated 28.06.2017 has sent the details of 12 important Members to OP disputing  delivery report  but the same has not been rebutted by the OP with the evidence of proof of delivery.
5. The letter dated 30.06.2017 and 01.07.2017 from the Complainant to the OP are also required to be rebutted by the OP but have not been rebutted which is considered to be deemed acceptance of the deficiency on its part.
6. The OP has given undertaking to ensure timely delivery of the articles but has not fulfilled this promise.
7. It has been seen from the reply filed by the OP in respect of allegations levelled in Para 7 (a) & (b) of the complaint that the allegations have not been denied with evidence and irrelevant reply has been furnished.
8. The OP has admitted that it could deliver only 19489 articles which is sufficient to substantiate the deficiency of service on its part.

 

(9)                In view of the above observations, we are of the considered view that the complainant has suffered directly due to deficient service of the OP ( DTDC Courier Pvt. Ltd. ) in terms of the deficiency defined in the Act which includes  any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained in relation to any service and includes any act of negligence or omission or commission by such person which causes loss or injury to the consumer. It has also been observed from the reply of the OP that the OP, in order to hide its deficiency in service, has tried to mislead this commission by incorrect figures and dates of receipt  of AGM books and has also denied the vital facts without any evidence and for this act, we also feel appropriate to impose cost upon the OP.

(10)              Though the deficiency in service and harassment to the complainant by the OP is proved, the quantum of compensation is to be quantified in light of the prayer and documents filed by the complainant in support of the prayer.  Since the complainant has not filed any documentary evidence in support of its prayer of claim of Rs.250000/- as cost of the printing of AGM books and Rs.5000/- as expenses incurred by the OP staff, we are unable to quantify this amount for payment by the OP. Regarding prayer No.1 for compensation  for failure of OP to deliver the articles and also for the harassment & mental agony faced by the complainant, it has been admitted by the OP that it could deliver only 19489 out of 30456 articles and admittedly 10967 articles remained undelivered. Therefore, we feel appropriate to direct the OP (M/s DTDC Courier Pvt. Ltd.) to:-

I.        Pay Rs.125000/-(Rupees One Lakh Twenty Five Thousand only) as compensation to the Complainant for the mental pain, agony and harassment;

II.       Pay the cost of Rs.50000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) which shall be deposited in the “ State Consumer Welfare Fund (L/Aid), SBI Account No.10310544717, IFSC No.SBIN0018175” within 30 days from the receipt of this order.

 

(11)              It is clarified that if the abovesaid amount is not paid by the OP to the Complainant within the period as directed above, the OP shall be liable to pay interest @12% per annum from the date of expiry of 30 days period.

(12)    Order be given dasti to the parties in accordance with rules. Order be also uploaded on the website. Thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

 

ASHWANI KUMAR MEHTA                                         DIVYA JYOTI JAIPURIAR

                                                           Member                                                                          President

                                                    DCDRC-1 (North)                                                       DCDRC-1 (North)