Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/453/2013

Bhupinder Singh s/o Sh.Bir Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Madhur Courier - Opp.Party(s)

D.C.Aggarwal

01 Apr 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR AT JAGADHRI.

                                                                                    Complaint No. 453 of 2013.

                                                                                    Date of institution: 17.06.2013.

                                                                                    Date of decision: 01.04.2016.

Bhupinder Singh aged about 42 years son of Sh. Bir Singh, resident of Village Hariya  Bans, PO Naharpur, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.      

                                                                                                                      …Complainant.

                                    Versus

Madhur Courier Services, Near Railway Station, Yamuna Nagar.    

                                                                                                            …Respondent.

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. D.C.Aggarwal, Advocate, counsel for complainant.  

              Sh.Sumit Garg, Advocate, counsel for respondent.

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection 1986.   

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant sent an envelope by courier to Sh. Manish Hooda, Shivaji Colony, Rohtak on 09.02.2013 through the respondent (hereinafter referred as OP) courier agency which contains some important papers of share market. The said envelope has not been delivered to Sh. Manish Hooda at Rohtak. The complainant has contacted the OP so many times but the OP did not give any satisfactory reply. Finding no other alternative the complainant served a legal notice on 24.4.2013 mentioning therein that to trace out the envelope of the complainant but the OP intentionally and deliberately neither gave any reply nor traced out the envelope of the complainant and lastly prayed for directing the OP to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for damages and Rs. 10,000/- as loss suffered by the complainant and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses.

3.                     Upon notice, OP appeared and filed its written statement by directing some preliminary objections such as complaint is not maintainable, envelope of the complainant has already been delivered and the complainant has filed this complaint to extract money from the OP without just, cause and valid reason and further the complainant has prayed for payment of compensation etc. to the tune of Rs. 60,000/- and legal expenses of Rs. 10,000/- but the prayer of the complainant is beyond the terms of limited liability agreement between the complainant and the OP. It has been submitted that liability of the OP is limited to Rs. 100/- as per contract between the complainant and OP and the said term of the said limited liability was duly accepted by the complainant as he booked for delivery the envelope through the OPs and on merit it has been admitted that complainant sent an envelope by courier through the OP courier agency and the same has already been delivered which bears the initial. Copy of the same is Annexure R-1. Further, it has also been admitted that complainant had served a legal notice dated 24.4.2013. However, this legal notice was sent only to harass the OP because the OP had already supplied the documents. Rest allegations were also specifically denied and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX and documents such as Photo copy of courier receipt dated 9.2.2013 as Annexure C-1, copy of legal notice dated 24.4.2013 as Annexure C-2, Photo copy of postal receipt as Annexure C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

5.                     On the other hand, counsel for the OP tendered into evidence delivery receipt of courier as Annexure R-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.   

6.                     We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully.

7.                     The only dispute between the parties is for not delivering an envelope containing important papers of share market to one Manish Hooda, Shivaji Colony, Rohtak sent on 09.02.2013 through OP Courier Agency vide receipt No. 8202011873 dated 09.02.2013. As per the version of the complainant till the date of filing of complaint i.e. on 17.06.2013 courier sent by him had not been delivered by the OP whereas as per the version of OP’s they have already delivered the courier in question which is evident from delivery receipt Annexure R-1. We have perused the delivery receipt Annexure R-1 carefully wherein no date of delivery has been mentioned by the OP. Even the OP failed to disclose the date and month on which the courier in question was delivered. Although the complainant has not filed any affidavit of that person i.e. Manish Hooda to which the said courier was sent to prove that he has not received the said courier sent by the complainant and in the absence of any cogent evidence it cannot be presumed that courier in question had not been delivered by the OP. However the OP failed to disclose the date of delivery, hence, we are of the considered view that the courier in question might have been delivered after a considerable time which was forced to the complainant to issue a legal notice as well as to file the present complaint. Hence, we are of the view that the complainant might have suffered some mental agony and harassment and is entitled to get some relief.

8.                     Resultantly, we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the OP to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment as well as litigation expenses. Order be complied within 30 days after preparation of copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per law. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced :01.04.2016.

 

                                                                        (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                        PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                                        (S.C.SHARMA    )

                                                                        MEMBER