Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

FA/199/2012

THE REGIONAL MANAGER, DTDC COURIERS, OPP. TO. A.C. MARKET - Complainant(s)

Versus

G. ANANDAKUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

SARVABHUVANAM

10 Feb 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

 

BEFORE        THIRU.J. JAYARAM         PRESIDING  JUDICIAL MEMBER 

                        TMT. P. BAKIYAVATHI                                              MEMBER

 

                                                                       F.A.199/2012

[Against the Order in  C.C No.541/2010 dated 27.12.2011 on the file of the DCDRF, Coimbatore]

 

Dated this the 10^th day of FEBRUARY 2015

 

1. The Regional Manager/Marketing Manager,

DTDC Couriers, opp to A.C.Market,

CPO Hotel, Vikrant,

Ludhiana – 141 001 , Punjab                    

 

2. The Regional Manager/Marketing Manager,

DTDC Couriers, 6/130 Ramnagar

1^st street, Tirupur 641 602                          ..Appellants/opposite parties

                                              Vs

G.Anandakumar

S/o Gurusamy

#198, New C.T.C Colony

K.N.P.Colony post

Dharapuram Road, Tirupur                         .. Respondent/complainant

 

 Counsel for Appellants/opposite parties    : M/s Sarvabhuvman Associates

Counsel for Respondent/complainant         : Publication called absent

 

This appeal coming before us for final hearing on 28.11.2014  and on hearing the arguments of the Appellant’s counsel, and upon perusing the  material records, this commission made the following order.

THIRU.J.JAYARAM,  PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.     This appeal is filed by the opposite parties against the order of the District Forum, Coimbatore in CC. 541/2010 dated 27.12.2011 allowing the complaint. The case of the complainant is that on 4.2.2010, he booked two parcels  containing   different  needles to his address at Tirupur through the 1^st opposite party, but however only one parcel was received by the complainant and the other parcel was not delivered by the opposite parties and did not reach the destination. Even after contacting the opposite party, the other consignment was not delivered to the complainant. The complainant purchased the needles at Ludhiana for Rs.15,000/-. The non-delivery of the parcel amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and hence the complaint.      

 

2.     According to the opposite parties, the District Forum has no territorial Jurisdiction to entertain the complaint further the liability is restricted to Rs.100/- only.

 

3.      The District Forum considered the rival contentions and allowed the complaint passing an order directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards the cost of the consignment and the sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and to pay costs of Rs.1000/-  

 

4.       Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellants have preferred this appeal.

 

5.       Admittedly the parcel did not reach the destination and not delivered to the complainant/consignee, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

 

6.        It is pertinent to note that the consignments are booked for the place of delivery at Tiruppur under the territorial jurisdiction of District Forum, Coimbatore and the cause of action arises at Tiruppur and therefore the contention of the appellants/opposite parties that the District Forum at Coimbatore does not have territorial jurisdiction, is untenable and we hold that the District Forum, Coimbatore has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

 

7.    It is relevant to note that there may be limit of Rs.100/- as compensation as pointed out by the District Forum, but the complainant has not signed the consignment note accepting the terms and conditions of the complaint.  In the amended complaint, complainant has claimed compensation praying for direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.43,742/- to the complainant towards the cost of the machinery spare parts and needles, and a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards business loss and Rs. 50,000/-  for mental agony and sufferings due to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and costs of Rs.7500/-

 

8.      The District Forum has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards the cost of the consignment and a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and sufferings caused to the complainant due to the  deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and to pay costs of Rs. 1000/-.

 

9.   Considering all these, we feel that award of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation  for mental agony is very much on the higher side and we are declined to reduce the compensation to Rs.20,000/- and therefore the order of the District Forum is to be  modified accordingly.

 

10.       In the result, the appeal is partly allowed modifying the order of the District Forum by reducing the award of compensation of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) for mental agony to Rs. 20,000/-(Twenty Thousand only) and confirming the rest of the order. No order as to costs in the appeal.             

                  

 

P.BAKKIYAVATHI                                                  J.JAYARAM

     MEMBER                                            PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER