Kerala

Malappuram

CC/53/2011

SAJEER.T - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S ON DOT COURIER SERVICE - Opp.Party(s)

04 Feb 2014

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/53/2011
 
1. SAJEER.T
S/O ABDUL GAFOOR. T,THORAPPA-HOUSE, HAJIYARPALLY-PO, 676519-PIN.
MALAPPURAM
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S ON DOT COURIER SERVICE
C/O DIGI WORLD DTP& PHOTOSTAT, CITY CENTRE, DOWN CANARA BANK-676505.
MALAPPURAM
2. THE MANAGER
ON DOT COURIER SERVICE,OPP. GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL,PO-TIRUR.
MALAPPURAM
3. M/S ON DOT COURIER DISTRICT FRANCHAISE
KURIKKAL PLAZA BUILDING, KACHERIPPADI,MANJERI-PO.
MALAPPURAM
4. ON DOT COURIER & CARGO LTD
8/42 KEERTHI NAGAR INDUSTRIAL AREA NEW DELHI 110 015
5. ONDOT COURIER4CARGO LTD
8/42 KEERTHI NAGAR INDUSTRIAL AREA NEWDELHI 110015
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. MOHAMMEDALI K PRESIDENT
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

By Sri. K. Mohammed Ali, President

  1. The case of the complainant is that he had booked a consignment of the Mother Board and Processor of the computer, for being carried from Malappuram to be delivered to RASHI at Kozhikkode on 23-10-2010 by Courier Service. The goods are entrusted with opposite party No.1 who had promised that, the goods will be delivered safely, undamaged and without loss at the destination indicated by the consignor on the next day itself. The opposite party No.1 issued a Receipt for the same. But on 25-10-2010, he came to know that the goods is not delivered and it is missing on transit. The goods are worth Rs.24,000/- so the complainant is demanding to pay the price of the goods along with compensation.

  2. On 11-04-2011, opposite party No.3 reply received directly in Forum stating that they have stopped business with Ondot Courier as Franchisee. Correct address of the opposite party No.2 is furnished and Notice was issued to opposite party No.2 in the correct address. Opposite party No.1 and 2 is not served as shop closed. The complainant filed a petition as IA-173/2013 requesting to implead opposite party No.4, along with an affidavit. Opposite party No.4 received the Notice, but did not appear in the forum and he was not replied also. So the case against opposite party No.4 is set exparte. No contra evidence was adduced and no version was submitted by any opposite parties.

  3. We have verified the complaint, affidavit and documents. On perusal we came to the conclusion that opposite party No.4 is deficient in service. The consignment was lost in transit due to the negligence of the opposite parties. So they are liable to compensate the complainant.

  4. In the result, we order that the opposite party No.4 shall pay the price of the computer ie., Rs.24,000/-(Rupees Twenty four only) to the complainant with interest @ 10% per annum, from the date of complaint till the date of payment along with Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) towards the cost of this proceedings within one month of the receipt of the copy of this order.

 

Dated this 4th day of February, 2014.

Sd/-

K. MOHAMMED ALI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

R. K. MADANAVALLY, MEMBER

Sd/-

MINI MATHEW, MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Nil

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Sd/-

K. MOHAMMED ALI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

R. K. MADANAVALLY, MEMBER

Sd/-

MINI MATHEW, MEMBER

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. MOHAMMEDALI K]
PRESIDENT

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.