By   Smt.Sheena.V.V., Member :

          The case of the complainant is that the complainant was consigned with a consignment D 13179014 booked on 29/5/2013 containing MBA study and dress materials in his address.  He did not get delivery of the items in time, so he sent a legal notice to deliver the item within 48 hours.  Delivery was given only on 11/7/2013.  Since consignment was not delivered in time he suffered loss and that the opposite parties behaved in a bad manner when contacted.  The act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the complaint is filed for getting compensation and cost of the case.

          2. The opposite parties appeared and filed detailed version contending that the complaint is not maintainable and no locus standi to file this complaint.  In the version of the opposite parties, they stated that the consignment bearing consignment No.D 13179014 was booked on 29/5/2013 by the complainant through DTDC courier and Cargo Limited for consigning the consignment from Bijnore (Madhya Pradesh) to Trichur (Kerala).  The said consignment reached the office of the 1^st opposite party on 4/6/2013, without the address of the consignee.  However, the opposite Party’s office in Trichur received a lawyer notice dated 2/7/2013, requesting the opposite parties to deliver the consignment within48 hours from the receipt of notice.  In the meanwhile the address of the consignee was also received from the booking office at Bijnore.  Based on that information of the consignee’s address from the booking office and from the contents of the lawyer notice, the consignment was taken for delivery to the consignee’s address on 9/7/2014.  But the complainant refused to take delivery and he demanded a written letter from the opposite parties.  1^st opposite party’s  Assistant Branch Manager issued a letter and sent the consignment to deliver on 11/7/2014.  So there is no deficiency in service committed by opposite parties.  Hence dismiss this complaint.

          3. Points to be considered that :

1) Whether the opposite parties had committed deficiency in service or not ?

2) If so what reliefs and costs ?

          4. When the case is posted for evidence, the complainant filed proof affidavit and 5 documents produced, which are marked as Exts.A1 to A5.  Ext.A1 is the copy of consignment receipt, Ext.A2 is the lawyer notice, Ext.A3 series (2 Nos.) are the postal acknowledgement card, Ext.A4 is the letter dated 11/7/2013 and Ext.A5 is the Admit card of complainant.  The complainant is thoroughly cross examined by opposite party’s counsel as PW1.

          5. From the side of opposite parties, the Branch Manager of 1^st opposite party filed counter proof affidavit and no supporting documents produced.  He is adduced oral evidence and cross examined by complainant’s counsel as RW1.

          6. The complaint is filed for getting compensation to the deficiency in service committed by opposite parties.  But the opposite parties denied all the allegations put forwarded by the complainant.  We have gone through the affidavit and documents of both sides and also the depositions of PW1 and RW1.

          7. The main contention taken by the opposite parties that the consignment reached the 1^st opposite party’s office on 4/6/2014, without the address of the consignee.  But from the Ext.A1 the carbon copy of consignment receipt, which shows the address of consignee.  There is no documentary evidence adduced by opposite parties.  Hence the arguments of opposite parties are unbelievable.  As per the Ext.A4 document, they admitted as “As you are aware that the consignment is a cloth bag, we assure that the delivery address sticked by DTDC officer, Bijnore on the bag might have lost in transit”.  So from the words of 1^st opposite party and Ext.A4, we could find that the deficiency in service committed by opposite parties.

          8. In the result, the complaint is allowed and opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation to the complainant with cost Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand and five hundred only) within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 30^th day of March       2017.