Punjab

Faridkot

CC/15/108

M/s B.J Interlock - Complainant(s)

Versus

DTDC Express Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Jaswinder Singh Dhillon

28 Oct 2015

ORDER

     DISTRICT  CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL   FORUM,   FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :      108

Date of Institution : 19.08.2015

Date of Decision :    28.10.2015

 

M/s B J Interlock Industry, Shaheed Ganz Road, Mudki, District Ferozepur through partner Kuldeep Singh s/o Surjit Singh, r/o village Mudki,  District Faridkot.                                                                                  ...Complainant

Versus

1. DTDC Express ltd Branch Faridkot, Nehru Shopping Centre, Faridkot through MD/concerned person.

2. DTDC Express Ltd Regd. Office No. 3, Victoria Road,Bengaluru-560047......... OPs

    

   Complaint under Section 12 of the

   Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

    

   Quorum:     Sh. Ashwani Kumar Mehta, President,

   Smt Parampal Kaur, Member,

   Sh P L Singla, Member.

   Present:       Sh Jaswinder Singh Dhillon, Adv. Ld Counsel for Complainant,

   OPs  Exparte.

    

   (Ajit Aggarwal,  President)

                      Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against DTDC Express ltd & another/Ops seeking directions to Ops to refund the charges for delivering the courier and compensate him to the tune of Rs 50,000 for harassment and has also prayed for litigation expenses of Rs 11,000/-.

   2                                  Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant manufactures interlock tiles under the name and style of M/s B J Interlock Industry and as per Govt instructions to get ISI mark, there was need for 4 samples of raw material to the Lab at Kailtech Test and Research Centre Pardespuri, Indore. It is contended that as per Govt Specifications, complainant sent 4 samples to Indore Laboratory through DTDC Courier Service, Faridkot and also sent a draft worth Rs 32,000/- and OP-1 received Rs 6300/- as delivery charges as per DTC plus vide receipt no.*V236545078  dt 28.07.2015 and OP-1 assured the delivery of parcel within three days. It is contended that one sample and draft have not been delivered till now to the said laboratory, but three samples of raw material received in the laboratory. It is submitted that complainant deposited amount of Rs 27,500/- through On Line Bank Service on 10.08.2015 and in this way, business of complainant is stopped and Government tenders have not been fulfilled and failed to supply the Interlock tiles without the necessary permission due to non delivery of sample and draft. Complainant made many requests to OPs to solve his problem but all in vain and thus, due to bad service of OPs, complainant suffered loss to the tune of Rs 48 lacs as his business stopped due to non fulfilling of Government conditions in time and tenders were cancelled. This act of OPs has caused great harassment and mental tension to complainant, which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Complainant has prayed for directing OPs to pay Rs 32,000/- with interest and for compensation of Rs.50,000/- besides Rs 11,000/- as cost of the complaint. Hence, the complaint.

   3                                                The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 27.08.2015, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

   4                                            Notice was issued to OPs through RC on 27.08.2014 and Ops were declared to have been duly served through RC containing notice and copy of complaint and as none appeared in the Forum on behalf of Ops on the date fixed, therefore, OP-1 and OP-2 were proceeded against ex parte vide order passed by this Forum on dt 6.10.2015 and 9.10.2015 respectively.   

   5                               The complainant tendered in Ex parte evidence, his affidavit Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 and Ex C-4 and then, closed his evidence.

   6                                         Ld Counsel for complainant in his exparte arguments contended that complainant is running the business of manufacturing interlock tiles at Mudki. To get ISI mark as per Government specifications, he was in need to send 4 samples of raw material to Laboratory at Indore for testing. The complainant sent 4 samples to Indore Laboratory through OPs courier services and also sent a demand draft for Rs 32,300/- alongwith samples. OP-1 received Rs 6,300/- as delivery charges vide receipt dt 28.07.2015 and assured that their parcel would be delivered within 3 days. Copy of the demand draft is Ex C-3 and receipt issued by OP-1 is Ex C-4. Out of 4 samples and demand draft, only 3 samples of raw material are received by the laboratory and other one sample and demand draft have not been delivered to laboratory uptill now by OPs. Due to it, the complainant is forced to deposit the amount of Rs 27,500/- online in the account of laboratory being testing fee. Due to non delivery of sample and demand draft by OPs in time, complainant has suffered huge business loss as their business is stopped and Government tenders cannot be issued to them as their tiles did not fulfil specification mark. Complainant requested Ops many times to solve their problem but to no effect. Due to bad services of OPs, complainant suffered huge financial loss. This act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of Ops. Complainant has prayed for directing OPs to pay the amount of demand draft i.e 32,300/- alongwith  interest and also to pay compensation and litigation expenses.

   7                                           We have heard the ex-parte arguments addressed by ld counsel for complainant and have also carefully gone through the record available on the file.

   8                                   The case of the complainant is that he is the manufacturer of Interlock Tiles and to get ISI mark specification for their tiles, they sent samples of their raw material for testing to the laboratory at Indore through OPs but OPs did not deliver all samples and demand draft to the laboratory and misplaced the said demand draft and one sample of raw material in transit, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice.

   9                                               From the careful perusal of the record and in view of documents placed on file, this Forum is fully convinced with the arguments advanced by ld counsel for complainant and found that OPs are deficient in service and there is trade mal practice on the part of OPs for not delivering the samples and demand draft of complainant in time. Hence, the present complaint is hereby allowed. The OPs are directed to pay Rs 10,000/-to complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him and Rs 3000/-as litigation expenses. The OPs are further restrained to encash the demand draft or misuse it, which was sent by complainant through them. OPs are directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Copies of order be supplied to the parties free of costs under the rules. File be consigned to record room.

   Announced in Open Forum

   Dated : 28.10.2015

                                  Member            Member                  President

    (P Singla)          (Parampal Kaur)     (Ajit Aggarwal)