Present: 1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President.
2. Smt. Sheena.V.V, Member.
3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member
30th day of June 2015
C.C.561/14 filed on 11/9/2014
Complainant : Muhammad Abdul Rahman @ Muhammed,
S/o.Saidhu, Palathopil House, Kandanassery
Village, Kandanassery.P.O., Thalappilly Taluk,
Thrissur.
(By Adv.Saji Joseph, Thrissur)
Opposite Party : 1. DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd., Registered
Office No.3, Victoria Road, Bengaluru, rep.
by Manager.
2. DTDC delivering value, P.P. Building East
nada, Near railway gate, Guruvayur,
Thrissur, rep. by Manager.
O R D E R
By Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar Member :
The complainant had booked a consignment containing ‘Prasadam’ on 6/8/2014 through the 2nd opposite party, as per consignment No.V.17728601 to the addressee M/s.A.Muhammed Yusuff, Advocate and Notary, Karur, 639002, Tamilnadu. The opposite party had assured the complainant that they will deliver the consignment on 7/8/14 itself to the addressee, when the complainant informed the importance of delivering the ‘Prasadam’ on 7/8/14 itself. The opposite party also collected Rs.350/- from the complainant towards service charges for the prompt delivery of the item, after knowing fully well the contents of the parcel, its value and its importance. But the consignment had not reached the addressee on 7/8/14, as promised by the opposite party. Even though the opposite party attended some telephone calls of the complainant and ensured delivery, he later switched off the mobile phone. Therefore the complainant went directly to the office of the opposite party and enquired about the non-delivery of the parcel. However, the opposite party instead of honouring the grievance of the complainant by tracing the whereabouts of the parcel, misbehaved to the complainant. The consignment did not reach the addressee on 7/8/14, as promised, but reached only on 8/8/14 afternoon, after the end of the purpose of the “Prasadam”. This has not only caused much embarrassment to the addressee and his colleagues but also resulted in lowering the image of the complainant before the addressee, which in turn, caused much mental pain and agony to the complainant, apart from financial losses. Since the above action of the opposite party is a clear deficiency of service, as well as unfair trade practice, the complaint filed, for orders, directing the opposite party to pay Rs.350/-, being the amount collected from him together with 12% interest from 6/8/14, ad also Rs.50,000/- as compensation, in addition to cost.
2. The opposite parties remained exparte. The complainant has filed proof affidavit and also Exhibits P1 to P3. There is no contra evidence and as such, the contents of the complaint stands proved.
3. In the result the complaint is allowed. The Forum is of strong opinion that such incidents, shirking from the agreed responsibility and thereby causing much mental agony and difficulty to consumers should not be allowed, to be repeated. The Forum therefore is of view, of strong punishment, in this case. The opposite parties are therefore, directed to pay Rs.350/- (Rupees Three hundred and fifty only) to the complainant with 12% interest from 6/8/14 till realization, in addition to Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) towards compensation and cost, within a month of the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 30th day of June 2015.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
M.P.Chandrakumar Sheena.V.V. P.K.Sasi, Member Member President.
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext.P1 Receipt dt. 6/8/14
Ext.P2 Publication issued by the contestants in the election
Ext.P3 Election roll of bar association, Karur
Id/-
Member
