Kerala

Trissur

CC/14/22

Sheela Davi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Martin (Amala Opticals ) DTDC Franchise. - Opp.Party(s)

Shrikumar Nambanath

14 Oct 2014

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
AYYANTHOLE
THRISSUR-3
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/22
( Date of Filing : 08 Jan 2014 )
 
1. Sheela Davi
W/O G S Panicker,Puzhakara (H),Peramangalam Po
Thrissur
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Martin (Amala Opticals ) DTDC Franchise.
DTDC Franchise,Amala Nagar,Amala Po
Thrissur
2. Manager
Regional office,A43/1, 608,Opp. North Railway station road,Cochin
Thrissur
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. Padmini Sudheesh PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. SHEENA V V MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. M P Chandrakumar MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Shrikumar Nambanath, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 14 Oct 2014
Final Order / Judgement

14th day of  October 2014

                                     C.C.22/14 filed on 8/1/14

 

Complainant:        Sheeladevi, W/o.G.S.Panicker, Puzhakkara House,

                             Peramamgalam.P.O., Thrissur.

                             (By Adv.Shrikumar Nambanath, Thrissur)

 

Respondents:        1. Martin, (Amala Opticals), DTDC Franchise,  

                                Amala Nagar, P.O.Amala, Thrissur.         

                             2. Manager, Regional Office, A43/1 608 Opp. North

                                 Railway Station Road, Cochin.

 

                                      O R D E R

By  Smt.Padmini Sudheesh, President :

          On 5/9/13 the complainant along with her friend had purchased two sarees and two blouses from Kalyan Silks.  On 10/9/13  these articles were sent to the friend by parcel service to Thiruvanathapuram.  But the parcel is not  yet obtained to the  consignee.  The articles  cost Rs.11,500/-.  The complainant sent a letter to the parcel service office and they replied that the parcel  has misplaced.  The act of respondent is deficiency in service.  Hence the complaint.

 

          2. The respondents remained exparte.

 

          3. The complainant filed affidavit and Exhibits P1 and P2.  There is no evidence to the contrary.

 

          4. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay the cost of the articles of Rs.11,500/- (Rupees Eleven thousand and five hundred only) and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation with costs Rs.750/- (Rupees Seven hundred and fifty only) within a 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 14th  day  of October        2014.

 

                                                                     Sd/-                                                                                       Padmini Sudheesh, President.

            Sd/-

                                                          Sheena.V.V, Member.

            Sd/-

                                                          M.P.Chandrakumar, Member

 

                             Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits

Ext.P1 Courier receipt

Ext.P2Lr. dt. 23/11/13

                                  

                                                               Id/-

                                                          President

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Padmini Sudheesh]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. SHEENA V V]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. M P Chandrakumar]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.