Haryana

Ambala

CC/16/2011

ASHISH ENTERPRISES - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S DTDC CURIER AND CARGO LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

SARVJEET SINGH

21 Nov 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                                                    Complaint Case No.    : 16 of 2011

                                                                                    Date of Institution      : 06.01.2011

                                                                                    Date of Decision         : 22.11.2016

 

Ashish Enterprises, 6342 Nicholson Road, Ambala Cantt through its  Priprietor, Vinod Kumar S/o Om Parkash.

                                    ……Complainant.

Versus

1.         M/s DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd. No.3, Victoria Road, Banglore-560047 through its Managing Director.

2.         Branch Manager M/s DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd. 113/6, Idgah Road,Near Sewa Samati School, Machhi Mohalla,Ambala Cantt.

3.         Gulshan Lamba M/s DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd. 2442/2 Timber Market, Ambala Cantt-133001.

                                                                                                ……Opposite Parties.

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act

CORAM:        SH. D.N. ARORA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.

Present:           Sh. Sarvjeet Singh, Adv.  for complainant.

                        Sh. Naveen Chawla, Adv. for Ops.

 

ORDER.

                        In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant is C&F agent for Syngenta India Ltd. and during the course of transaction of business on behalf of the said company, complainant firm received order for the supply of 10 Kgs. Tomato Seeds ‘Heema Sona’ from Ajay Enterprises, Bus Stand Theog, District Shimla (HP).   It has been submitted that  on 28.11.2009, complainant firm vide delivery  order no.115510 dispatched the said seeds  to Ajay Enterprises, Shimla packed in three cases, out of which, 2 cases were of 4 Kg each and the third was weighing 2 Kg. and were couriered  through OP No.3 vide consignment No. D01795697 dated 28.11.2009 on payment of requisite charges. The consignment was worth Rs.2,40,000/-. It has been submitted that  out of the three cases, just one case was delivered at Shimla on 02.12.2009 whereas two cases were lost  in transit due to negligence of the Ops thereby a loss of Rs.1,44,000/- occurred to the complainant.  It has been submitted that  Syngenta India Ltd. raised the debt note against the complainant worth Rs.1,44,000/-  which they deducted from the commission payable to the complainant.  Further it has been submitted that complainant written several representations to the Ops requesting them to settle his claim but the Ops lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other.  Hence, the present complaint seeking relief as per prayer clause.

2.                     Upon notice, Ops appeared through counsel and tendered written statement raising preliminary objections qua maintainability of complaint being time barred as a claim against the Op  can be filed within one month and the OP is not liable  to any damage occurred during the course of business to the extent of Rs.100/-. No declaration of consignment was disclosed by the complainant at the time of its booking. Consignment was not insured as it is mandatory that consignment more than value of Rs.10,000/- is required to be insured.  On merits, it has been urged that all the consignments were delivered vide run sheet no.*97984141 dated 02.12.2009 which was duly signed by the consignee after  receiving the three consignment with fully satisfaction  and  thus complainant has not suffered any loss as alleged.  Hence, a prayer for dismissal of complaint with costs has been made.

3.                     To prove their case, counsel for complainant tendered affidavits of  Vinod  Kumar  as Annexures CW1/A & CW2/A alongwith documents as Annexures C-1 to C10 and closed the evidence on 09.04.2012.  On  the other hand, counsel for Ops tendered in evidence affidavit of Mahesh Pathak as Annexure RX alongwith documents as Annexure R-1 and closed the evidence.

4.                     We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record very carefully.  It is not disputed between the parties to the complaint that the consignment of three cases allegedly having seeds were sent to Ajay Enterprises, Shimla by the complainant firm. Perusal of courier receipt Anneuxre C-1 reveals that the courier was having 3 number of pieces which were sent to Ajay Enterprises, Shimla on 28.11.2009 and a sum of Rs.598/- were paid to the OP Courier vide Annexure C-2.  Delivery Order  no.115510 dated 28.11.2009 (Annexure C-3)  reveals that cost of the consignment was Rs.2,40,000/-.   Annexure  C-4 is a letter written by  Ajay Enterprises, Shimla to  complainant  informing that he has received only one case of Heema Sona tomato Seed having 4 kg. in place of 3 cases as mentioned in delivered order no.115510. Annexure C-5 is a letter written by Syngenta Company to complainant whereby they have deducted an amount of Rs.1,44,000/- from  monthly claim & credit  to party in his account. The Syngenta Company has deducted the amount from the commission of complainant being the complainant is franchisee of the abovesaid company despite the fact that complainant has written letters Annexures C-6 to C-8  to  the OP-DTDC Courier.

                        The arguments of counsel for Ops is that the consignment  having value more than Rs.1000/- is required to  be insured but the consignment of the complainant was not insured. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on their part and they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.

 5.                    After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, at the very outset, the pleadings of the Ops that as per run sheet no.*97984141 (Annexure C-9), all the consignments were delivered to the consignee with their full satisfaction but on next page of  this Annexure reveals that consignee Ajay Enterprises, has received only one case and has  shown balance two case as per  the bill. This document has not been disputed by counsel for Op during the course of arguments, as such, the aforesaid version of OP is not tenable.  Besides it, M/s Syngenta India Limited has deducted a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- from monthly claim of complainant  vide Annexure C-5.

                        In view of the above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that OP courier has failed to consigned the seed cases to its destination despite charging fee from the complainant and because of which complainant has to suffer a loss to the tune of Rs.1,44,000/-.  Accordingly, we are of the confirmed view Ops are negligent and deficient in providing proper services to the complainant.  Hence, the present complaint is allowed with costs  and Ops are directed to comply with the following directions within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-

  1. To pay a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the institution of complaint till actual realization.
  2. Also to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- to the complainant on account of mental harassment and litigation charges.

                        Copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules.  File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

                                                      Sd/-

Announced on:21.11.2016                                                                 (D.N. Arora)                          

                                                                                                                  President

 

                                                                                                                 Sd/-

                                                                                                (Pushpender Kumar)

                                                                                                                   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.