DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES RERESDSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVIENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

CASE NO.1091/14

Navdeep Singh Bhatia

C-49 A, Ground Floor,

Chhatarpur Enclave, Phase-II,

New Delhi-110074.                                                           Complainant

                                                      Vs

DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd.

B-101, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-I,

West Delhi, Delhi-110028.

Opposite Parties

                                            DATE OF ADMISSION-28.11.2014                                                          DATE OF ORDER        -02.01.2014

 O R D E R

SH.  N.A ZAIDI,PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed with the allegation that complainant approached the opposite party at their Lajpat Nagar office for courier of a letter to his CA on 7^th of July, 2014 vide DTDC reference no.Z-26756744 and secondly on 10^th of July, 2014 vide DTDC reference no. Z-26757276 to the addressed of M/s Raj C. Sri & Co., attn: Shri Ram 206-207 Laxmi Chamber, B-223 Laxmi Nagar (Near Metro Station), Delhi-110092. After one week of posting of these letters, he find out that his CA has not received these letter. He chases DTDC office at Lajpat Nagar, he was given the phone number of Mr. A.K. Mishra (09953165088) Mr. Mishra assured that letter will be return back to their Lajpat Nagar office, New Delhi. He again contacted Lajpat Nagar office many times, but he fails to find out Mr. Mishra in the office and he was not given any reply by any person present in the office. He has to rearrange all the documents of both the letters and got delivered to the CA through the other courier company. The complainant has prayed for the refund of the amount paid, compensation for rearranging the documents, compensation for mental pain and agony expenses incurred in transportation and cost of litigation.

Notice was issued to the opposite party which was delivered on 01.12.2014, as it is clear from the speed post tracking report but no WS has been filed finally case proceeded ex-parte. The complainant has filed his affidavit in support of complaint which is uncontroverted on record.

Heard and perused the record.

 The complainant has filed the receipts of booking the two letters. This is clear from the statement on oath and the complainant that these two letters were never delivered to address M/s. Raj K Sri and Co. This is also not controverter that the complainant has not arranged the documents which were meant for the CA. The fact of visiting the office at Lajpat Nagar have also not been denied. The entire material on record shows that the respondent company have not only failed in their obligation to deliver the letter to the addressee after charging the fee but they also not responded to the  quarries raised by the complainant. He was falsely assured that his documents shall be return to him. He has to arrange these documents after spending money and time for resending these documents to the CA. This has caused mental tension, pain and agony apart from the harassment of the complainant. We find substance in the allegations of the complainant that respondent has been deficient in providing the services.

We allow this complaint. The respondent is directed to refund to the complainant, the amount of Rs.50/- charged for two letters by the OP. The cost of re-arranging the documents apart from the compensation for mental pain and agony and cost of litigation we assessed it at Rs.10,000/ This amount of Rs.10,000/- is to be paid by OP to the complainant within 45 days of the order if it is not paid the complainant shall be entitled for 9% interest over this amount from the date of filing of this complaint till it is paid by the respondent.

Let copy of the order be served on both the parties as per rule.

        (POONAM MALHOTRA)                                                        (N.A.ZAIDI)

                    MEMBER                                                                         PRESIDENT