Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/109/2018

Sative Chauhan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mr. Anil Rana Branch Manager, DTDC - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

06 Aug 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	109 of 2018
Date  of  Institution	:	21.02.2018
Date   of   Decision	:	06.08.2018

 

 

 

 

Sative Chauhan s/o Sh.Satpal Chauhan, Sative Niwas, Sangti, Sanjauli, Shimla, H.P.      

 

             ……..Complainant

Versus

 

1]  Mr.Anil Rana, Branch Manager, DTDC, Plot No.198, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Panchkula-160036

 

2]  Ms.Anupama Bakshi, DTDC, Plot No.198, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Panchkula 160036

 

3]  Ms.Surinder, DTDC, House NO.8, Sector 15-a, Chandigarh 160015

 

4]  Mr.Nandu, Co-conspirator with Ms.Surinder DTDC, House No.8, Sector 15-A, Chandigarh.  

 

……. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH. RAJAN DEWAN           PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA        MEMBER

                                SH. RAVINDER SINGH        MEMBER

           

 

Argued By: Complainant in person.

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, Adv. for OPs along with Ms.Shawinder Kaur, Manager of DTDC

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

                                The case of the complainant, briefly is that the complainant gave a box of phone to DTDC at Sector 15, Chandigarh to be delivered to one Shubham Bisht at New Delhi for which they exorbitantly charged an amount of Rs.750/- plus Rs.210/- as insurance and took an amount of Rs.1000/- from him against total amount of Rs.960/-.  However, after 30 minutes of booking, the complainant got the consignment cancelled with OP No.3.  It is averred that the Opposite Party No.3 confirmed the cancellation of booking and told the complainant to visit on Monday to collect the package. It is alleged that when the complainant visited Opposite Party NO.3 on Monday and provided her the bill, she kept it in locker and refused to return to the complainant.  It is stated that she detected that the other details were also on the package, she further tore apart the packing of the complainant’s box and threw the box at him.  It is submitted that the complainant was not refunded the amount paid to the OPs nor any receipt for the transaction.  It is also submitted that Opposite Party No.3 illegally stole his bill/cash memo and even tore the packaging with bad intentions. The complainant brought this matter to the notice of OPs No.1 & 2, but to no avail. Hence, this complaint has been filed. 

 

2]       The Opposite Parties have filed reply and stated that as per the record, the complainant never came to the office on that date neither booked any parcel nor any receipt regarding the booking parcel has been issued by the Office of Opposite Party on that date in favour of complainant, which is clear from the receipt books (Ann.R-1 & R-2).  It is stated that when the answering OPs had not issued any receipt, then there is no question of booking of any parcel as alleged by the complainant. It is also stated that as the complainant has not booked any parcel, the question of suffering any loss or damage does not arise. Denying whole of the allegations of the complainant, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint with heavy costs.

 

3]       Rejoinder has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of the OPs made in their reply.

 

4]        Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the complainant in person, ld.Counsel for the OPs and have also perused the record.

 

6]      The allegations set out in the complaint pertaining to the retaining of Rs.1000/- paid by the complainant against the booking of parcel/consignment, which later on alleged to have cancelled, are not supported with any cogent documentary evidence.  There is no record to show the payment of Rs.1000/- made by the complainant to the OPs, as alleged. The allegation of the complainant that the bill issued by the Opposite Parties was illegally & wrongfully retained by the Official of Opposite Parties, has been countered by the OPs with duly sworn reply that nothing of the sort has happened since the complainant never visited them to book any consignment.  The OPs have completely denied the factum of any booking made by the complainant on the fateful day.  In the absence of any cogent documentary evidence and also in the absence of any document showing the consideration paid, the version of the complainant cannot be relied upon. Hence, no case of deficiency in service is made out against the OPs.

 

7]       In view of the above findings, the present complaint stands dismissed being without merit.  No order as to costs.

         Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge. After compliance, file be consigned to record room.

Announced

6^th August, 2018                                       

                                                                                                Sd/-

                                                                   (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER