IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Tuesday the 30th day of March, 2010
Filed on 3.4.2009
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.149/2009
between
Complainant:- Opposite Party:-
Kerala Advocate Clerks Association The Manager, Speed and Safe
Alappuzha Unit, District Court Courier Service, Kumaranasan
Compound, Alappuzha Represented Building, Alappuzha
by its Secretary, S.Rajendran (By Adv. C. Parameswaran)
Veliyil House, Poonthoppu Ward
Alappuzha
(By Adv. K.B. Anilkumar)
O R D E R
SRI. JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
Complainant’s case is as follows: - The complainant, on 28th February 2008 sent original medical bills for Rs.17,432.90/- and claim form to the Kerala Welfare Funds Committee, Trivandrum through the opposite party. The bills so sent were for the purpose of availing reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by the members of the complainant. The opposite party charged Rs.13/- and issued a receipt for the same. On seeing no response from the Kerala Welfare Funds Committee, the secretary of the complainant made an enquiry to the said effect. It was learnt that the articles sent through the opposite party did not reach there. With the result, the Kerala Welfare Funds Committee declined to reimburse the medical bills with out original bills. The complainant approached the opposite party. The opposite party without any qualms stated that the articles sent through the opposite party could have been lost in transit. There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The complainant sustained financial loss as well as mental agony. Aggrieved by this, the complainant approached this Forum seeking relief.
2. On sending notice the opposite party turned up. Version in detail was filed. The contentions of the opposite party are that at the time of entrusting the cover in issue, the opposite party was not apprised of the content or its value. The cover was delivered to the address shown in the face of the cover. Had the complainant approached the opposite party with in a reasonable time the cover could have been retrieved. As a matter of fact, the laxity on the part of the complainant was responsible for the grievances if any, the opposite party submits. That apart the complaint is bad for misjoinder of necessary parties. The complaint is only to be dismissed.
3. The complainant filed proof affidavit and produced documents - Exts. Al to A6 were marked. On the side of the opposite party, they filed counter proof affidavit and submitted that there is no oral evidence.
4. Bearing in mind the submissions of the parties the issues come up for consideration are:-
(1) Whether the opposite party delivered the article entrusted by the complainant?
(2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as sought for by the complainant?
5. The complainant entrusting the article to the opposite party or its acceptance for sending the same is not in dispute. Having regard to the facts of the instant case, the contentious issue is whether the cover entrusted to be delivered to the Kerala Welfare Funds Committee was handed out to them. Going by the materials placed on record by the opposite party, it appears that, the opposite party is taking contradictory contentions simultaneously. At one point, opposite party submits that the cover was delivered to the addressee address of which was noted on the face of the cover. At once, the opposite party argues that once the complainant took up the matter sufficiently at an earlier stage with the opposite party the same could have been retrieved. Another contention taken out by the opposite party is that the complainant has not informed the content of the cover at the time of entrusting the same to the opposite party. We went through the evidence let in by the parties. We are of the view that there is no substance in the contentions of the opposite party. Barring bare statements, the opposite party produced no evidence worth the name that lend credence to their contentions. On the other hand, the complainant produced the copies of the medical bills and claim forms which fortify its contentions as to the contents of the cover. The contentions of the opposite party are inconsequential. In the absence of any material to substantiate the contentions of the opposite party, we have no way out, but to accept the case of the complainant.
6. In view of the above consideration and analysis, the opposite party is directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.17432.90/- (Rupees seventeen thousand four hundred and thirty two and ninety paisa only) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
In the result, the complaint is allowed accordingly. No order as to cost and compensation.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of March, 2010.
Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah:
Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan:
Sd/- Smt.N.Shajitha Beevi:
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Proof affidavit filed
Ext.A1 - Photo copy of the medical certificate
Ext.A2 - Photo copy of the receipt of courier service
Ext.A3 - Advocate notice dt. 11.11.2008 (Photo copy)
Ext.A4 - Postal receipt (Photo copy)
Ext.A5 - Original courier service receipt
Ext.A6 - Letter dated 27.2.2008 (Photo copy)
Evidence of the opposite party:-
Counter Proof affidavit filed
// True Copy //
By Order
To Senior Superintendent
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:-pr/-
Compared by:-
