SRI JIBAN KRUSHNA BEHERA, MEMBER (I/C)
The complainant has filed this complaint petition, U/s-12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, (here-in- after called as the “Act”) against the Ops alleging deficiency-in-service with a prayer for compensation.
2. The case of the complainant, in a nut-shell, is that on 14.4.2014, he had been to his native from Chennai on completion of his study and for the purpose he booked a consignment viz. his study materials, utensils, baggage, luggage, personal belongings and accessories with the OP No.1 & 2 situated at Tharamani, Chennai to be delivered in his village and for the purpose he had paid Rs.7,000/- under valid money receipt bearing Bill No.8155. The above consignment consisting of four cotton boxes and one trunk box. At the time of booking of the above consignment, OP No.1 & 2 assured to deliver the same in the address given with utmost care and security within 10 days of booking, but the same has not been delivered by them within one month for which the complainant became handicapped expecting his future life. Thereafter, he contacted with OP No.1 & 2 several time in getting his consignment, but in vain. But one day, he received a telephonic call from OP No.1 & 2 to the fact that the booked consignment was with them and to receive the same from the office of OP No.4 instead of home delivery by paying extra charge of Rs.1,830/-. Finding no other alternative, the complainant paid the extra charges on 6.9.2014 and received back only one trunk, two cartoon boxes and one gunny bag in a damaged condition from OP No.4, but another cotton box containing valuable items like books and study materials were found missing. Due to the above illegal and arbitrary acts of the Ops, the complainant was constrained to take the above consignments from Balasore to Jaleswar which is 60 Kms away. The complainant had also contacted with the Ops requesting them to refund his missing articles, but they did not pay any heed to it. The conduct of the Ops amounts to serious deficiency of service and sheer negligence of duty which caused financial loss and mental agony. Hence, this case.
3. In the present case, as the complainant has not taken any step against the OP No.1, the case against him was dismissed. The OP No.2 & 4 did not appear in this case nor filed their written version for which they were set ex parte. Only the OP No.3 appeared and filed written version stating, inter alia, that there was no contract for service between the complainant with this OP. Further, this OP was not aware about the articles inside the box as the packaging was done by the complainant himself. This OP was only a carrier and not done the packaging of the goods. As per the terms and conditions, the OP is not responsible for packaging and any kind of damage which may be caused due to faulty packaging is not attributable to this OP. Further, the consignment was delivered at the place of complainant with utmost care and all possible professional expertise. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the case.
4. The points for determination in this case are as follows:-
(i) Whether the complainant has any cause of action to file this case?
(ii) Whether the case is maintainable?
(iii) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the Ops?
(iv) What other relief(s), the complainant is entitled to?
F I N D I N G S
5. In support of his case, the complainant has filed the Bill No.8155 dated 14.6.2014 amounting to Rs.7,000/-, Particulars of Delivery challan vide Sl. No.8152 dated 14.6.2014 showing 4 nos. of cotton box and one trunk box, Despatch voucher No.8157 dated 14.6.2014 which shows that consignment was despatched in vehicle bearing Regd. No.TN-07BX-3195 and the delivery days was 16 days, Money receipt issued by OP No.4 shows that a sum of Rs.1,830/- was paid by the complainant and delivery draft dated 6.9.2014 shows that the complainant had received one trunk and two cartoon box, one gunny bag in damaged condition from the office of OP No.4. On the other hand, OP No.3 has not filed a scrap of paper in support of its case.
6 On a meticulous scanning of the documents produced on behalf of the complainant, it is crystal clear that the complainant had deposited consignments like 4 nos. of cotton box and one Trunk box before the OP No.1 & 2 for sending the same to his native address given therein and for that he had paid the surcharge fee of Rs.7,000/- on 14.6.2014. But, as alleged by the complainant, the consignment has not been delivered in his address, rather, it was delivered to the complainant in the office of OP No.4 situated at Balasore which is 60 Kms away from his native. It is seen that the complainant had further paid Rs.1,830/- on 6.9.2014 to the OP No.4 at the time of given delivery of only four items (vide draft delivery challan/docket bearing No.423209689) out of five which were booked in the office of the OP No.1 & 2. It is found from the delivery challan No.8152 dated 14.6.2014 that the complainant had booked 4 nos. of cotton box and one trunk box, but he had only received four items and another one item has not been received by him and stated to have been missing. The OP No.3 has not stated a single word with regard to the missing items nor has satisfactorily explained under what circumstances one item of the complainant was missing which contained valuable books and other articles. Besides the above, it is seen from the Cash Bill No.8155 dated 14.6.2014, Delivery challan No.8152 dated 14.6.2014 and Despatch voucher No.8157 dated 14.6.2014 that the consignment was booked for delivery of the same in the native address of the complainant such as At- Patharapura, Post Office- Jaleswar, District- Balasore, PIN-756032. But, as it is seen from the documents submitted by the complainant, the part consignment was received by him in the office of OP No.4 situated at Balasore which is about 60 Kms away from the native of the complainant and further, the OP No.4 has received an extra amount of Rs.1,830/- from the complainant which was not at all disclosed from the Cash Bill, Delivery challan or despatch voucher dated 14.6.2014. Therefore, first of all, it is crystal clear that the Ops have failed to deliver the consignments in the address given by the complainant at the time of booking of the consignment for which he had paid Rs.7,000/- and secondly, the complainant had received part consignment from the office of the OP No.4 situated at Balasore which is 60 Kms away from the address given by the booking order and delivery challan on paying further cash of Rs.1,830/- illegally. Further, the complainant has not yet received back one of his consignment which was contained with valuable articles. From the above nature and character of the Ops, it is clear that they are not only involved in unfair trade practices, but also deficient in rendering proper service towards the complainant. Hence, a case of deficiency in service is squarely made out against the Ops.
7. Admittedly, in the present case, the complainant has availed the services of the Ops not for the commercial purpose. The complainant by engaging the services of the Ops sent valuable books and articles to his native place. Thus, it is held that the services were engaged in normal course of business. Therefore, the Ops, except OP No.1, are jointly and severally liable to pay the value of the consignment.
8. Taking into consideration the above discussions made in the foregoing paragraphs, this Commission is of the considered opinion that the complainant has cause of action to file the present case and the case is maintainable. Consequently, the complainant is entitled to the compensation, as prayed for.
Hence, it is ordered –
O R D E R
The case of the complainant be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.P No.3, on ex-parte against O.Ps No.2 & 4 and dismissed against O.P No.1. The O.Ps No.2 to 4 are jointly & severally directed to:-
- pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the complainant towards the value of the consignment.
- return the surcharge fee of Rs.7,000/- plus Rs.1,830/- with interest @ 9% per annum from 14.06.2014 till its realization to the complainant.
- pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- for mental agony and litigation cost to the complainant.
All the aforesaid awarded amounts shall be paid by the O.Ps No.2 to 4 to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to realize the same from the O.Ps No.2 to 4 through the process of law.
Pronounced in the Open court of this Commission, this the 3rd day of December, 2024 under the signature & seal of the Commission.
