JUDGEMENT

          Complainant by filing this complaint has prayed for compensation against the ops over establishment on the ground that complainant some certain valuable articles by consignment and the said article booked one consignment on 29.08.2009 at about 2:30 PM through the Branch Office of the op no.1 at Strand Road Branch, Kolkata-700001 in respect of Challan No.14144 dated 29.08.2009 and Invoice No.NB/11891/2009-2010 dated 29.08.2009 the General Motors India Pvt. Ltd. on account of TYCO Fire & Security India Pvt. Ltd to deliver the consignment at Pune, office of the General Motors India Pvt. Ltd. and a sum of Rs.421/- was charged for the delivery of the said consignment by the office of the op no.1 and op received the charges and also the consignment.  But subsequently it was found that the said article has not been delivered to the consignee and complainant contacted with the local office of the op but they failed to give any assurance about the ultimate delivery but subsequently complainant was informed that since the consignment has lost requirement to file the claim for its value and under compelling circumstances, complainant filed this case to the tune of Rs.13,542.64/- and it was received by the op but whatever op disposed of the settled claim matter and has been harassing the complainant and at the same time for that reason complainant has been financially loss and for which the present complaint is filed for relief and redressal.

          Whereas the op nos. 1 to 3 by filing writing statements submitted that the present complaint is not maintainable because it is commercial transactions and it is crystal clear on the averments of the notice dated 15.09.2009  that consignment was not delivered to his customer and it is also submitted that the claim is barred by law in view of the booked article on 29.08.2009 whereas complainant lodged this complaint before this Forum on 06.07.2010 and further denied all other allegations without asserting anything positively regarding the allegations of the complainant and proceeded accordingly in the present Forum.

                                       Decision with reasons

          On careful consideration of the argument as advanced by the Ld. Lawyers for both the parties and also considering the documents including the written version it is found that no doubt complainant took the consignment through the ops at Kolkata but it is the contention of the Ld. Lawyer of the op that is a commercial purpose and same is not only the insurance of the life of the complainant and the case is filed after expiry of schedule period and it is barred by limitation.  Further it is submitted that complainant is partnership firm and instant case is not maintainable.  But peculiar factor is that regarding consignment of the article and loss of article, there is no dispute and no dispute was raised by the op either in the written version or at the time of advertisement by the op’s Ld. Lawyer.  So, considering that fact we are convinced to hold that complainant has admitted the vital fact that complainant sent consignment through op and value of the articles in the said consignment was Rs.12,642/- and admitted position is that consignment was not delivered to the consignee though op received Rs.412 as --------- charge and it is also admitted position that it was lost from the custody of the ops.

          But considering the entire fact we have gathered that op has not challenged the cost of the lost articles and also payment of Rs.412/- as delivery charge and fact remains the consignment had in fact not been delivered to the addressee and as per report of the op, it was lost.  Another fact is that complainant submitted the claim application as per letter of the op and it was received by the op but it was not disposed of and ultimately it was reported to the complainant by the op that the same is under process since certain verification is required for settlement.  So, it will take sometime to render filter and further reported within a few days the complainant will get back the out come of the said claim and Annexure-C is a claim form and Annexure-D is reply of the op.  So we are confirmed that complainant has proved his case beyond any manner of dispute and he has also proved that articles which was consigned through op was lost from the custody of the op and op failed to deliver it and then no doubt the negligent and deficient manner of service on the part of the op is proved and it is equally proved that op did not settle the claim of the complainant and has been harassing.

          In the above situation after relying upon the information report does not ------ of NC in Revision Petition 2737/2007 passed on 29.08.2011 by Hon’ble Justice A.V. President and Hon’ble Mrs. Vinita Ray, Member and also considering the present attitude of the op and non-existence of any sort of contract in between the parties we are convinced to hold that complainant is entitled to get compensation in respect of the such articles which was consigned by the complainant through the op and another factor is that no terms and conditions pertaining to delivery of the parcel has been produced by the op and also there is o agreement in between the two parties regarding adhereance the terms and conditions if any in respect of the damages for loss of the articles and for which we are inclined to hold that for loss of the articles from the custody of the op we received it but delivery the consignee after receiving Rs.412/-  invariably complainant is entitled to receive Rs.13,543/- including compensation of rs.10,000/- for adopting an unfair means by the ops not to dispose of his claim.

          Thus the complaint succeeds.

          Hence, it is

                                                 ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is allowed with cost of Rs.2,000/- against the ops.

          Ops are directed to refund or to pay the sum of Rs.13,543/- the value of the lost article including the service charge and further directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- for harassing the complainant and for adopting unfair trade practice and same would be paid by the op along with litigation cost within one month from the date of this order failing which for each day’s delay op shall have to pay punitive damages @ Rs.200/- per day till full satisfaction of the decretal amount.

          For adopting unfair trade practices, op nos. 1 to 3 are imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000/- which shall be deposited to the State Consumer Welfare Fund.

          Ops are directed to comply the order within one month very strictly and without failing and if failing which the penal action shall be taken against them for which they may also be sent to jail for implementation of this order.