This case is coming for final hearing on 08-07-2014 in the presence of Sri K.Kameswara Rao, Advocate for Complainant and Opposite party set exparte and having stood over till this date, the Forum delivered the following.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

: O R D E R :

(As per Sri V.V.L.Narasimha Rao, Honourable Member on behalf of the Bench)

1. The complainant filed the present complaint under Sec.12 of Consumer Protection Act against 1^st Opposite party on 5.12.2013 and requested the Forum to direct the Opposite party to pay Rs.75,000/- to the complainant along with Interest till realization from the date of complaint @ 2% per annum also complainant requested to award costs for filing this complaint.

2. The brief facts are as follows: The complainant is residing at Hyderabad and doing Software business in Flat No.302 Atlantic Whisper Valley, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Bachupally, Nizampet Road, Hyderabad-500090. He secured a job at Visakhapatnam and he wants to transport his luggage to Visakhapatnam at his residence vide D.No.55-7-24, Sanjay Gandhi Colony, Old Venkojipalem, Visakhapatnam-530022 for purpose of the transporting the said household items. So he hired the services of the Opposite party packers and movers for Transporting 32 items of his luggage from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam on 29.6.2013, which has to be delivered at Visakhapatnam on 1.7.2013. For the said service the charges were fixed as Rs.11,000/- which has to be paid to the Driver and acknowledged by the official of the opposite party by name Mr.Asif Khan. The Opposite party has delivered only 31 articles out of 32 articles, which was transported from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam. The article which was missing was Black Trolley Box containing wearing apparel of the complainant including under garments etc. The said Black Trolley Box is valued for Rs.15,000/- and it contains Hundi dedicated to God containing Rs.10,000/-. Even after repeated requests also the said black trolley box was not handover to the complainant. Having vexed with the attitude of the Opposite party, he got issued Legal Notice on 23.09.2013 to the Opposite party official Mr.Asif Khan & Rajesh for returning the trolley box with Hundi containing Rs.10,000/-. Even after receipt of the Notice also, the Opposite party not responded claiming Rs.25,000/- (i.e. Rs.10,000/- Hundi amount + R.15,000/-) value of the wearing apparel and Rs.50,000/- towards damages for non-delivery of the box. In toto the complainant claimed Rs.75,000/- from the Opposite party for non-delivery of the black trolley box. Hence this complaint.

3. Notice served to the Opposite party and on 20.01.2014, as there is no representation from the Opposite party, the Opposite party was set ex-parte.

4. On perusal of the aforementioned averments of the complainant, the following points were framed for consideration.

   1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite party and

   2. to what relief.

5. The complainant filed his Evidence Affidavit reiterating the entire averments and facts mentioned in the complaint. On behalf of complainant Exs.A1 to A7 were marked. Even after giving opportunity also the complainant has not filed the Written Arguments and the matter was posted for orders to decide on merits.

Point Nos.1 & 2: The present complaint was filed by the complainant for claiming Rs.75,000/- from the Opposite party as the Opposite party has not delivered one article i.e. Black Trolley box including Hundi amount of Rs.10,000/-. Even after receiving the Notice from the Forum also the Opposite party was not responded and he was set ex-parte.

7. Ex A7 is the Bunch of documents (3 Nos.) dt. 7.6.2013. Receipt No.1228, dt. 7.6.2013 which is on the name of Ch.Uday Kiran for Transporting 42 Articles from Hyderabad to City Centre, Durgapur, West Bengal State for consideration of Rs.34,500/-. Ex.A6 is the E-mail intimation dt. 24.07.2013 for missing baggage i.e. Black Suit case value Rs.15,000/- sent through Opposite party. Ex.A4 is the letter dt. 23.09.2013 sent to Mr.Asif Khan i.e. the employee of the Opposite party and Ex.A5 is the Receipt for sending the Ex.A4. Ex.A1 is the Legal Notice issued through Advocate dt. 10.01.2013 to the Opposite parties. Ex.A2 is the Postal receipt for sending Ex.A1. Ex.A3 is the returned cover which was sent to the Opposite party i.e. Ex.A1 Notice. In the Ex.A4 and Ex.A1 complainant mentioned about black suit case with trolley stand which comprises of dresses worth of Rs.15,000/- and Hundi with Rs.10,000/- cash. Though the complainant as mentioned in the complaint that he has delivered 32 articles from the Opposite party from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam.

8. As seen from the Ex.A7, dt.7.6.2013. It reveals that there are 42 items relates to one Sri Ch.Uday Kiran not to the complainant. Even observing the Ex.A7 Packing list is mentioned as the vehicle transported from Hyderabad to West Bengal and packing list has to be handover to Sri Ch.Uday Kiran C/o Biplab, Kumarsarkar, Devi Chou Dharani Path, City Centre, Durgapur-71 the Black Trolley Box is not mentioned in Ex.A7. Initially at the time of filing the complaint on 5.12.2013, the Section might have raised objection for want of relevant necessary document within 21 days. Hence in this matter, the Section has not taken steps to that extent.
9. Except Ex.A1 to A7 documents, the complainant has not shown any documents to prove that he has sent 32 articles from the Opposite party’s packers and movers from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam. Even observing Ex.A7 Packing list dt.7.6.2013 though the name of the complainant is not mentioned in the Packing list with careful observation; there is no mention about Black Trolley box as mentioned by the complainant in Ex.A6, A4 & A1. Hence in the absence of the evidence that the Opposite party was set ex-parte, we cannot come to a conclusion that there is deficiency on the part of Opposite party. As necessary document is not furnished we conclude that the complaint is liable to be dismissed without costs. Accordingly the Point Nos.1 & 2 are answered.
10. In the result the complaint is dismissed without costs.

    Dictated to the Shorthand Writer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 18^th day of July, 2014.

     

     

           Sd/-                                                                     Sd/-

    President (FAC)                                                         Member           

                                                                            District Consumer Forum-I

                                                                                Visakhapatnam

     

    CC 285/2013

    APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

     

    Exhibits Marked for the Complainant:

    Ex.A1	10.10.2013	Registered Lawyer’s Notice	Office copy
    Ex.A2		Postal Receipt evidencing registration of the notice	Original
    Ex.A3		Returned cover from the Opp. Party’s address with Postal endorsement as ‘NOT CLAIMED’	Original
    Ex.A4	23.09.2013	Letter demanding return of the missing box and intimating legal action for non-return
    Ex.A5	23.09.2013	Receipt of DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd. evidencing sending of the notice through courier	Original
    Ex.A6		G-mail	Net print
    Ex.A7	07.06.2013	Documents  evidencing earlier transaction through the opposite party three in number

     

    Exhibits Marked for the Opposite Party:     Ex-parte

     

     

             Sd/-                                                                  Sd/-

    President (FAC)                                                         Member           

                                                                            District Consumer Forum-I

                                                                                Visakhapatnam