DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

 

CASE   NO:   CC-  21  of 2017

 

Sri Arup Kumar Nath,

S/O- Sri Arun Kumar Nath,

Opp. Badharghat Petrol Pump,

P.O. Siddhiasram, P.S. Amtali,

Agartala, West Tripura. .....…...Complainant.

 

 

        VERSUS

 

 

Sri Ratan Sarkar(In-charge),

DTDC Lite, H.G.B. Road, 

Post Office Chowmuhani,

Agartala,

DTDC Courier Service. ......... Opposite parties.

 

 

 

                      __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI A. PAL,

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SRI U. DAS

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant : In person.

 

 

For the Opposite Parties : Sri Bimal Deb,

 Advocate.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON:   19.06.2017

 

 

 

J U D G M E N T

This case arises on the petition filed by one Arup Kumar Nath U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 

Petitioner's case in short is that on January 2017 he sent one bill of expenses to the Head Office at Natco Pharma, Hyderabad from Agartala through DTDC. He paid the DTDC charge for transmission of the bills to the head office but it was not sent. He requested the DTDC office at Agartala many times over telephone but no satisfactory response received. He sent Email but no response. As a result he did not get the expenses bill amount of Rs.9,670/-. Due to deficiency of service of DTDC he suffered mental agony and huge loss. 

 

2. O.P. DTDC, Agartala appeared, filed W.S. denying the claim. It is stated that claim in respect of consignment is not made within 30 days. In the event of damage or loss or misdelivery maximum liability of DTDC is Rs.100/-. The complainant never made any contact with the DTDC and there was no deficiency of service of DTDC at all.

 

3. On the basis of contention raised by the parties following points cropped up for determination:

(I) Whether DTDC failed to deliver the consignment to the addresee in the right time?

(II) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get compensation for the deficiency of service?

 

4. Petitioner produced the receipt, photocopy of expense statement, Email letter, tracking query status. Evidence of petitioner was also recorded.

5. O.P. DTDC produced no evidence only cross examined the P.W.

6. On the basis of evidence on record we shall now determine the above points.

Findings and decision:

7. We have gone through the receipt and found that the petitioner paid Rs.100/- charge for the transmission of the bill to Hyderabad. O.P. DTDC produced no evidence in support that the consignment was delivered to the address given by the complainant. Consignment number was K92483385. It was registered. Petitioner sent mail to the O.P. DTDC customer support team. It was stated that response not given from the DTDC. Mail was sent on February 11, 2017. The consignment was sent on 6th January, 2017. In the month of February he made contact and sent mail but no response given. 

8. The contention of the DTDC as revealed from the W.S is that the demand is to be made within one month. Petitioner waited for one month and thereafter made communication through mail. About the telephonic communication made by the petitioner no documentary evidence produced to prove. But petitioner stated that he made telephonic communication. Inspite of that DTDC failed to take any step. It is stated that their liability is only Rs.100/- in case of damage or loss of the consignment. No evidence given to support that.  It is one sided agreement not relevant at all.

9. From the evidence on record it is clear that consignment was lost. Petitioner sent the bill vouchers expenses bill claiming T.A., D.A. from the company and it was lost and he did not get the amount. This is happened for the negligence of the O.P. DTDC and the from the evidence it is clear that due to deficiency of service & negligence service the consignment did not reach to Hyderabad and as a result he did not get amount. Deficiency of service of DTDC is established. We therefore direct O.P. DTDC courier to pay amount of Rs.9,670/- to the petitioner. Petitioner suffered mental agony due to the deficiency of service and he is entitled to get compensation Rs.5,000/-. 

10. We therefore direct O.P. DTDC to pay amount of Rs.9670/- + Rs.5000/-. Total Rs.14670/- for the deficiency of service. Amount is to be paid within one month if not paid it will carry interest @ 9% P.A.

 

Announced.

 

 

SRI A. PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

 

 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA SRI U. DAS

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.