By Sri.P.K.Sasi, President

        The case of the complainant is that he has sent some goods to his friend’s daughter at Mumbai through the opposite parties. Whereas, the opposite parties did not deliver the goods sent by the complainant to the addressee. The goods sent were some particular sweets and homemade eatables and the addressee has arranged a feast with her friends expecting that the goods will deliver to her. Since the goods were not delivered she could not conduct the feast which created unnecessary mental agony and heavy hardship to her among her friends. Moreover, by knowing that the goods were not reached to the addressee the complainant also happened to sustain unnecessary mental agony and monetary loss as well as heavy hardship also. The complainant sent the goods by paying Rs.600/- as service charge and he assessed the cost of the goods sent about Rs.6,000/-. Since it was homemade the actual value cannot be fixed as cost of the goods sent. A lawyer notice was issued on 8/7/16 but no relief received. Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

        2) Being noticed on the complaint both the opposite partied entered appearance through counsel and filed detailed version. The opposite parties admitted the consignment booked by the complainant through the 2^nd opposite party at Thrissur, who is the franchisee of the 1^st opposite party. It is also admitted that the consignment was booked by the consigner to Mumbai. The opposite parties further stated that the consigner had neither declared the contents of the consignment nor its value at the time of booking the same for carriage. No additional payments were collected by the opposite parties. The opposite parties denied the allegations stated in the complaint. It is also admitted by the opposite parties that an amount of Rs.600/- was collected by the 2^nd opposite party only towards freight service charge for carrying the consignment from Thrissur to Mumbai. The opposite parties further submitted that on reaching the consignment at Mumbai they tried to contact the consignee but the phone number mentioned in the consignment was not correct. Therefore the opposite parties could not intimate the consignee about the  arrival of the consignment due to the wrong phone number and improper address provided by the consigner.

        3) The opposite parties further submitted that no complaint was made by the complainant regarding the loss within 30 days from the date of booking, as per the contract. Hence, the complaint is time barred and the complainant is not entitled to get any amount as compensation. The opposite parties admitted that they have received a lawyer notice issued by the complainant but they denied the contents of the notice. They further submitted that on receiving notice after tracking and on enquiries it was understood that the consignment was irrecoverably misplaced / lost in transit after reaching Mumbai.  The same was therefore immediately informed to the consigner. They also submitted that they are not liable to pay any compensation apart from the limited liability of Rs.100 as mentioned in the terms and conditions of the contract/consignment note leaf.  The opposite parties further submitted that they collected consignment for carriage subjected to terms and conditions that are specifically mentioned in the consignment note leaf. The opposite parties elaborately described regarding their terms and conditions on the note leaf in their version and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with cost since, any sort of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice were not happened on their part.  

        4) Then the case was posted for evidence and the points for consideration was that

                a) whether there was any deficiency in service or unfair

                    trade practice happened on the part of opposite  

                    parties ?

                b) if so what cost and relief.

        5) From the side of complainant he has appeared before the Forum and submitted proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. He also produced 6 documents which are marked as Ext. P1 to P6. Ext. P1 is the consignment note; Ext. P2 is the copy of lawyer notice; Ext. P3 series Postal Receipt (2 Nos); Ext. P4 & P5 A/D cards and Ext. P6 is the shipment summary printout. From the side of opposite parties neither any counter proof affidavit filed nor any documents produced. Hence we heard the learned counsel for the complainant in detail.

        6) We  have  gone  through  the  contents  of  affidavit  filed by  the  complainant  and  perused  the  documents produced. We  also  gone  through  the  contentions  raised  by  the opposite parties in their version. In the version filed by the opposite parties once they stated that they tried to contact consignee when  the  consignment  reached  at  Mumbai  but  they could not  contact  the  consignee  since the phone number and address  mentioned on the consignment were wrong. The opposite  parties  further  stated  that  on  receiving  the  legal notice  they  made  tracking  and  conducted  enquiries and it was understood that the consignment was irrecoverably misplaced / lost  in  transit  after  reaching  Mumbai. Both the contentions  are  utter  contradictory.  Hence  we  don’t  find  any specific and acceptable contention on the part of opposite parties. Therefore,  we  are  of  the  opinion  that the opposite parties have committed utter deficiency in service by not delivering the consignment sent by the complainant to the consignee. However the complainant claimed Rs.6,000/- as cost of the consignment sent but no supporting evidence adduced before us. According to the complainant he has sent homemade Mango halwa weighing about 4 Kg. Ext. P1 would go to show that the recipient’s name and address are clearly mentioned with pincode. Moerover, admittedly no reply was sent by the opposite parties on receiving the lawyer notice. Considering all these points discussed hereinabove we are on the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get compensation from the opposite parties for the deficiency in service committed by them.

        In the result, we allow this complaint and the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as cost and compensation to the complainant within one month from receiving copy of this order.

        Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the     30^th day of April 2018.

           Sd/-                                                      Sd/-

M.P.Chandrakumar                                     P.K.Sasi,

Member                                                       President.

                                Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits

Ext. P1 consignment note

Ext. P2 copy of lawyer notice

Ext. P3 series Postal Receipt (2 Nos)

Ext. P4 & P5 A/D cards

Ext. P6 shipment summary printout

                                                                             Id/-

                                                                        President