1.                     The brief history of the case of the complainant is that his nephew had sent a mobile phone on 06.05.2016 to the complainant through Ops vide AWB/Consignment No.V29067042 on payment of Rs.1250/- which includes charges and transit insurance value and it was to be reached within 24 hours of booking to the complainant but it was reached only on 10.05.2016.  Alleging a clear breach of obligation and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to pay Rs.17, 000/- on different counts towards compensation and costs to the complainant.

2.                     The OP.1 filed counter denying the allegations of the complainant but admitted about booking of alleged consignment on 06.05.2016 vide its Consignment No.V29067042 at 7.43 PM.  It is contended that consignment addressed to Rayagada, Koraput and Jeypore is generally sent through Hirakhanda Express from Bhubaneswar and the said consignment could not be dispatched on 06.05.2016 due to late booking.  It is further contended that it should be dispatched on 07.05.2016 but as 07.05.2016 was on Saturday and 08.05.2016 was Sunday, the consignment was dispatched on 09.05.2016 through Hirakhanda Express and delivered to the complainant on 10.05.2015.  It is also further contended that the consignment was booked with DTDC franchise at Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar and the fact should be intimated to the cosigner.  It was the fault of the said branch who has not disclosed the same fact to the cosigner.  Thus denying any fault on its part, the OP prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                     The DTDC Franchise, Lewis Road was added as OP No.3 considering the petition dt.20.4.2017 of the complainant.  In spite of valid notice, the Ops 2 & 3 neither filed counter nor participated in the proceeding in any manner.  The complainant has filed certain documents in support of his case.  Heard from the A/Rs of complainant and OP.1 and perused the materials available on record.

4.                     In this case booking of consignment on 06.5.2016 vide Consignment No.V29067042 with Ops at Bhubaneswar by the nephew of the complainant with charge of Rs.1250/- to be delivered to the complainant at Jeypore are all admitted facts.  The case of the complainant is that the consignment was booked on 06.5.2016 and it should be reached to the complainant within 24 hours but it was received by the complainant on 10.5.2016 which is a clear breach of obligation by the Ops.

5.                     The Op.1 stated that the consignment was booked with DTDC Franchise at Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar on 06.05.2016 at 7.43 PM.  The consignments meant for Rayagada/Koraput/Jeypore were being sent through Hirakhanda Express.  The cut off time for booking to above place is 6.00 PM as departure time of the said train from Bhubaneswar is 7.35 PM.  Hence on 06.5.16 it could not be dispatched.  The consignment should have been dispatched on 07.5.2016 but since 07.5.16 was Saturday and 08.5.16 was Sunday, the consignment was dispatched on 09.5.16 through Hirakhanda Express and the complainant received the same on 10.5.2016.

6.                     The OP.1 stated that the consignment was booked at Lewis Road Branch and the said branch should intimate the said fact to the cosigner.  In absence of counter and participation of OP.3 in this case, we could not know whether the said branch had informed the fact to the cosigner.  However, the OP.1 has submitted that due to Saturday and Sunday, they could not dispatch the consignment but did not clarify as to whether the Saturday was non-dispatch day of consignment for them.

7.                     In this case, the consignment was dispatched on 09.05.2016 and it was received by the complainant on 10.5.2016 safely as admitted in the complaint petition.  The complainant also did not say anything about the type of service availed by his nephew by booking the consignment.  It is seen that the nephew of the complainant had sent a mobile phone in the consignment which reached to the complainant safely.  In the above premises we do not find any reason as to how the complainant sustained such a huge loss of Rs.17, 000/- by not getting the consignment 2 days earlier to dt.10.5.2016.  Had the consignment containing life saving drugs or any important document, the matter would have been different.  Hence we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.

8.                     In the above premises, we do not find any merit in the case of the complainant which needs to be dismissed.  In the result, we dismiss the case of the complainant but without costs in the peculiar circumstances of the case.

(to dict.)