COMPLAINT FILED: 26.09.2008<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> 25th NOVEMBER 2008<br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO. 2099/2008<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Sri. Arvind Kumar. M.,<br /> S/o. Moolchand,<br /> Aged about 40 years,<br /> Proprietor M. Ashok & Company,<br /> Cloth Merchants, No. 25/5,<br /> D.S. Market, D.S. Lane,<br /> Chickpet,<br /> Bangalore – 560 053.<br /> <br /> <br /> Advocate (K.R. Ashok Kumar)<br /> <br /> <br /> V/s.<br /> <br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. Kerala Roadways Pvt. Ltd.,<br /> Post Box No. 6748, # 23, <br /> 4th Cross, Kalasipalayam New Extension, <br /> Bangalore – 560 002,<br /> Represented by its <br /> Branch Manager.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. Kerala Roadways Pvt. Ltd.,<br /> Corporate Office at:<br /> KRS Plaza, Indiragandhi Road,<br /> Calicut – 673 061.<br /> Represted by its <br /> General Manager (Administration)<br /> <br /> <br /> Advocate (G. Balakrishna Shastry)<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- and for such other reliefs on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> Complainant availed the services of the OP for the transportation of a consignment containing silk material worth of Rs.12,213/- to Ernakulam the consignee. OP collected the necessary charges and promised to deliver the said consignment within 2-3 days from 21.04.2007. But to the utter shock and surprise of the complainant evenafter the lapse of 6-7 months the said consignment was not at all delivered to the consignee. Consignee addressed a letter to OP so also the complainant, there was no response. For no fault of the complainant, he was made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. Due to the carelessness and negligence of the OP in non-delivery of the said consignment complainant suffered business loss and profits. Complainant even got issued the legal notice on 02.07.2008 to compensate him, again it went futile. Thus complainant felt the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief accordingly.<br /> <br /> 2. On appearance, OP filed the version denying all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. According to OP no such consignment is entrusted to them nor complainant disclosed the value and contents of the said consignment. Complainant has not hired the services of the OP as contemplated under the Act. The entire complaint is devoid of merits. The allegations are false and frivolous. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Among these grounds, OP prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is <br /> entitled for the reliefs now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No. 3 :- To what Order?<br /> <br /> <br /> 5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Affirmative<br /> Point No.2:- Affirmative<br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> <br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> 6. It is the case of the complainant that he availed the services of the OP for transportation of a consignment containing a textile goods of worth Rs.12,213/- to Ernakulam, Chochin. OP accepted the said consignment for transportation and issued the docket on 21.04.2007, collected the service charges. Complainant has produced the original copy of the consignment, particulars of textile as well as consignment note, consignee copy. According to the complainant he expected that the said consignment will be delivered within 2-3 days. But to his utter shock and surprise evenafter lapse of 6-7 months it was not delivered. Then both the consignee and the complainant respectively wrote a letter to the OP to deliver the said consignment on 11.10.2007 and 17.12.2007. The copies of the said letters are produced which are duly received by the OP. Again there was no response. Hence complainant felt the deficiency in service.<br /> <br /> 7. It is further contended by the complainant that when his repeated requests and demands made to OP either to deliver the consignment or compensate him, went in futile, he got issued the legal notice on 02.07.2008. The copy of the legal notice and postal acknowledgement is produced. Of course OP gave interim reply on 14.07.2008 contending that they are investigating the so called claim of the complainant. The said reply is also produced. The evidence of the complainant finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents referred to above. There is nothing to discard his sworn testimony. As against this unimpeachable evidence of the complainant, the defence set out by the OP is that they were not at all entrusted with the said consignment as contemplated. Hence they are not liable to pay any compensation nor complainant availed their services as defined under the Act. We do not find any force in the said defence.<br /> <br /> 8. OP wants to breathe hot and cold, at one breathe it says that there is no proof of entrustment of the consignment to them, but the documents referred to above speaks otherwise. In another breathe he says that the contents of the said consignment were not disclosed including the value of the consignment. Para. 12 of the version almost amounts to an admission of entrustment of the said consignment to OP. With all that to save its skin out of sin OP has set up some untenable defence. The hostile attitude of the OP must have naturally caused both mental agony and financial loss to the complainant. Complainant and consignee patiently waited for the delivery of the said goods for more than 6 months, unfortunately they are unable to get the said consignment containing the textile goods of worth. <br /> <br /> 9. OP has not given any reasonable and acceptable explanation for the non-delivery of the said consignment in time. When that is so, when the consignment note clearly discloses the value of the property as well as the contents of the material, we have no other go but to believe the say of the complainant and the accompanying documents. We are satisfied that the complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Of course the claim of the complainant seeking compensation of Rs.50,000/- appears to be baseless. In our view the justice will be met by directing the OP to pay the actual cost of the textile goods booked through the consignment that is Rs.12,213/- along with some nominal compensation and litigation cost. With these reasons we answer point nos.1 and 2 accordingly and proceed to pass the following: <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to pay Rs.12,213/- together with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from 21.04.2007 till realization and pay a compensation of Rs.1,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs.500/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within 4 weeks from the date of its communication.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 25th day of November 2008.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> p.n.g. <br />