Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/19/510

Balwinder Paul - Complainant(s)

Versus

Madhur Courier Services - Opp.Party(s)

Karan Singh Adv

28 Oct 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No:510 dated 01.11.2019.                                                        Date of decision: 28.10.2021. 

 

Balvinder Paul, Proprietor , T-XO Industries, #12706/1, Vishvakarma Colony, Street No.12, Industrial Area-B, Ludhianna-141003.                                                                                                                         ..…Complainant

                                      Versus

Madhur Courier Services, Plot No.803, Vishvakarma Street, Opposite PNB Bank, Gill Road, Ludhiana, through its Director/Partner/Proprietor.

SECOND ADDRESS:

Head Office: 226, Shalimar Trade Center, Hamidia Road, Bhopal.

                                                                                      …..Opposite party 

 

Complaint under Section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant            :         Sh. Karan Singh, Advocate.

For OP                           :         Exparte.

 

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENTs

1.                Simply put, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is running a business of manufacturing of Auto parts and general machinery under the name and style of T-XO Industries and is carrying on the business to earn his livelihood. On 27.11.2018, the complainant sent a parcel of auto parts to M/s. M/s. Meta Rolls ISPAT Pvt. Ltd., Gut No.48, adjacent to MIDC, Phase-II, Daregaon Jalna, Maharshtra-431203 through Northern Railway which was booked vide receipt No.M192627 dated 27.11.2018 from Ludhiana to Aurangabad, Maharashtra. On 28.11.2018, the complainant sent a parcel consisting of original customer copy of tax invoice bearing No.66 dated 26.11.2018, the original railway bility/receipt No.M192627 dated 27.11.2018 and the e-bill for delivery to M/s. Meta Rolls ISPAT Pvt. Ltd., Daregaon Jalna, Maharashtra. The parcel was handed over to the OP for delivery to the consignee at Daregaon Jalna, Maharashtra. The Op issued receipt No.340410073194s dated 28.11.2018 and charges a sum of Rs.20/- as delivery charges which was paid in cash. The OP assured the complainant  that the parcel would reach destination within 2 days. At the time of booking, the complainant informed the OP that the parcel contained the aforesaid documents which wass supposed to be delivered to the consignee at the earliest as without the railway receipt, the consignee would not be able to get the goods released from the railways. After 4-5 days of the booking, the complainant received a call from his consignee that the parcel had not been received. The complainant contacted the OP at Ludhiana to know the fate of the parcel/consignment and the OP assured the complainant that it would be delivered within 2-3 days. On 16.12.2018, the complainant again received a call from his consignee that the consignment has not been received and without the documents, he was unable to receive the delivery of the parcel from the railway, which was sent from Ludhiana on 27.11.2018. The complainant contacted the OP many a times, but without any fruitful result. The parcel has not been delivered to the consignee with the result that the complainant had to pay demurrage charges to the railways for getting the goods released from the railways. The complainant had to travel to Aurangabad, Maharashtra to get the parcel released. The complainant travelled to Aurangabad by train and returned by air. Non delivery of the parcel by OP amounts to deficiency of services and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP resulting in lot of inconvenience and financial loss to the complainant. In the end, it has been requested that the OP be directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of losses suffered by the complainant and another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for causing harassment to the complainant. 

2.                Upon notice, OP did not appear despite service and was proceeded against exparte.

3.                In exparte evidence, the complainant tendered his affidavit Ex. CA along with documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C11 and closed the evidenced.

 4.               We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record.

5.                In the affidavit Ex. CA, the complainant has reiterated the entire facts as set forth in the complaint. Ex. C1 is  the receipt issued by the OP vide which it received a parcel from the complainant for delivery at Daregaon Jalna, Maharashtra. Ex. C2 is the bill of the consignment sent by the complainant too railways to M/s. Meta Rolls ISPAT Pvt. Ltd., Daregaon Jalna, Maharashtra. Ex. C3 is the railway receipt vide which the consignment was sent by the complainant to M/s. Meta Rolls ISPAT Pvt. Ltd. The exparte evidence of the complainant has gone unrebutted on the file. From the uncontroverted evidence on record, it is established that the OP failed to deliver the parcel to the consignee at Daregaon Jalna, Maharashtra. Since the parcel contained the documents including the consignment receipt issued by the railways, delivery of the parcel was essential as without the receipt, the railways were not supposed to hand over the goods  to the consignee with the result that the complainant had to personally visit Maharashtra for getting the consignment released. This must have caused a lot of inconvenience and harassment to the complainant. Needless to say, the acts of the OP in not delivering the parcel to the consignee amounts to deficiency of service. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, in our considered view, it would be just and proper if the OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant as composite costs.

6.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint is exparte partly allowed with an order that the OP shall pay a composite compensation of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

7.                Due to rush of work and spread of COVID-19, the case could not be decided within statutory period.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:28.10.2021.

Gobind Ram.