BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 14^th DAY OF MAY 2024

ORDER

SMT. K. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR, MEMBER

Complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, complainant sought a relief from OP No.1 to 3 to pay an amount of Rs.2,31,000/- along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a., to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards delay, mental agony and cost of proceedings.

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

Complainant availed the transport service of OP for transferring his house old items from Mangalore to Bangalore. He got insurance for Rs.1,00,000/- from DRS Dilip Road lines Limited, in vide insurance No.4851602. For the insurance complainant has paid Rs.3,000/- as an insurance fee for insured value of Rs.1,00,000/-. OP has picked up house old goods on 29.06.2023 and transported from Mangalore to Bangalore, goods delivered at Bangalore on 30.06.2023.

3. Complainant stated that the staff of OP did not properly packed the goods, for that OP gave a reason that he has not sufficient material sheet for packing as OP did not provide them sufficient materials. OP promised to deliver the goods without any damage and also assured to grant insurance amount if any damages occurred. Complainant alleged that the vehicle for transport provided by OP was not secured vehicle and not delivered the goods in a proper manner. Hence the goods and items are damaged. Complainant even alleged that the goods not only damaged while packing and in transit, in between the Mangalore to Bangalore due to the rain, some items were damaged, as OP did not pack the house old items properly intact. Since the transport vehicle of OP was not in good condition, rain water fell on all the items and damaged many items including mattress during the transport, staff of OP had carelessly handled all items and damaged bike, dining table, broken kitchen items, queen size cot, chair, many other items as the complainant has given the price list of the damaged items. In total for the damage of queen size mattress, 6 seater teakwood dining table and chairs, easy chairs, sofa set, bike, queen size wooden storage bed, study table, 4 coffee mugs altogether, the items worth of Rs.1,78,500/- were damaged. Complainant repeatedly requesting OP to refund of money for the damages they made through whatsapp, E-mails. OP not bothered to answer to the request of complainant. Hence he claimed for compensation for the deficiency of service and delay they made to pay back the amount for which OP has not taken care off before delivering the items. Hence complainant approached this commission for the relief he sought above.

4. Notice sent to OP No.1 to 3 through RPAD, which were duly served on OPs. On the date of appearance, OPs No.1 to 3 were absent, hence they placed Ex-parte. OP No.3 appeared on the date of order through its counsel along with application but at this stage OP NO.3 cannot file its version since 45 days of period for filing version is lapsed.

5.  At this stage complainant filed affidavit evidence along with Certificate U/S 65B of IE act and copies of 4 documents, which are marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7. Complainant reiterated in the affidavit evidence as mentioned in the complaint. Complainant filed written arguments. Heard complainant and perused the materials on record.

OP No.3 through its counsel appeared at the stage of order with recalling application. But not filed version and not lead its evidence. OP NO.3 also not submitted any arguments on behalf of OP No.3.

6. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OP’s?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

7.  Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1:-Affirmative.

Point No.2:-Partly Affirmative.

Point No.3:- As per the final order.

REASONS

8. Point No.1&2:-These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

9. It is proved that the complainant has booked OP company for transferring his house old items to Bangalore from Mangalore. OP No.1 is the head office situated at Hyderabad, Telangana, OP No.2&3 are branch office and regional office respectively. Complainant paid Rs.31,000/- for transferring of his house old items on 29.06.2023 from Mangalore to Bangalore, which is at Ex.P.1, OP has issued receipt with categorically stated items and charges for transferring them. Ex.P.2 is the booking voucher issued by OP No.1, in the said statement OP disclosed that the complainant has availed insurance against the goods and items booked for transfer along with packing list of 90 items. In the said list, complainant has declared the amount of some items with their value, some are not mentioned. In total, complainant has declared for the items costs around Rs.91,000/-. When the complainant has alleged about the packing system,the vehicle of transferring the items, which were not in good condition. He also alleged that the rain water went inside the items in the transit and spoilt many of the items before delivery at the destination. When the OP has assured for loading, unloading, packing, unpacking, assembling the items at Bangalore, but many of the items were damaged before reaching the destination. Hence complainant tried to contact OP through whatsapp and E-mails, in few E-mails OP responded back and offered Rs.4,000/- and Rs.5,000/- to the complainant, damage caused during the transfer of the items, but complainant did not accept the offer, since he obtained insurance for the items with the OP by paying Rs.3,000/- as insurance fee for the insured amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence complainant in many E-mail communication, claimed for Rs.1,00,000/-for the damaged items, but the OP did not accept the same. Complainant even sent the amount of damaged items i.e. about Rs.61,000/- with the list through E-mail, OP not complied the claim of the complainant even after several requests and E-mails. Complainant produced the damaged items photos and the whatsapp communication between the OP and the complainant, which are at Ex.P.4 to Ex.P.6. They are not replied properly and they made the complainant to file this complaint for his relief. Complainant in para No.5 of complaint, has mentioned 9 items were damaged with a total cost of Rs.1,78,500/- .

10. It is relevant to discuss here that the complainant has declared the amount of items and also sent the list of damaged items and their values to OP through E-mail, is justifiable to accept the same for the consideration since he has obtained insurance on the items which he transferred from Mangalore to Bangalore. Here we can observe that OP has admitted that he has insurance against the items, then there is no question of rejecting the claim of the complainant or respond to the communication of complainant either by E-mail or by whatsapp. Therefore, in this condition OP has caused deficiency of service, without accepting the claim of the complainant even though the insurance of Rs.1,00,000/- against the items is existing. Therefore, complainant just in claiming the insurance of Rs.1,00,000/- towards damaged items and he is entitled for the same. Complainant claimed Rs.2,31,000/- with interest of 18% p.a. in his complaint, but he has not explained about the calculation of the amount of Rs.2,31,000/-. Hence it seems to be exorbitant and considering the list sent to OP through E-mail with damaged items with their values, complainant is entitled for the same and OP is liable to pay insured amount at least for the damages. OP further liable to pay compensation for the delay and mental agony for Rs.20,000/- and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation for which complainant has no option to approach this commission seek the relief for his grievance. On the above reasons, we answer Point No.1 in affirmative and Point No.2 in partly affirmative.

11. Point No.3:-In view of the discussion referred above, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

1. Complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, is hereby allowed in part.
2. OP No.1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards damaged items with interest at the rate of 10% p.a. from the date of delivery i.e. from 30.06.2023 till realization.
3. OPs further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation  for the deficiency of service and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation within 30 days from the date of order, failing which OPs shall pay interest at the rate of 10% p.a. on Award amount from the date of order till realization.
4. Furnish the copies of the order and return the extra copies of pleadings and documents to the parties, with no cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 14^th day of May 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

NIL