DATE OF FILING                    :     29-04-2015.

DATE OF S/R                            :      03-06-2015.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     05-11-2015.

Motilala Jhalani,

flat no. 302, 3^rd floor,

Radha Krishna Apartment, near Has Khali Pul,

opposite Amar Jyoti Apartment, Baultolla,

Howrah – 711109……………………………………………………..COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

M/S. Overnite Express Ltd.,

7A, Overnite House,

near Don Bosco School , Tiljola Road,

Govind Ghatak Road,

Kolkata – 700046……………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY.

 P    R    E     S    E    N     T

Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.      

F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has  prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs. 80,000/- for deficiency in service, monetary loss and mental agony for non delivery of one letter vide no. AWB 8370812026 dated 20-07-2014 in time which  containsed some documents. The letter was delivered to the complainant on 04-08-2014 after delay of 14 days.

2. The o.p., M/S. Overnite Express Ltd. in their written  version denied the material allegations made in the complaint and  contended interalia that there was no deficiency in service and the complainant did not suffer any loss or damage.  

3.         Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  ?

2. Whether the complainant is   entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4. Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. Whatever be the lofty claim of the complainant that the envelop delivered by the O.P. Courier service vide their no. AWB 8370812026 dated 20-07-2014 contains some documents. We are surprised to note that the complainant did not file any photo copy of the envelop itself nor the photo copy of the documents as alleged. In absence of these two vital documents, we are not in a position to ascertain if there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  It is further noticed that the complainant received the consignment  within 14 days and there is no allegations that he suffered a damage for such delay in delivery of the consignment. It is true that there was delay for a few days but such delay caused injury to the petitioner or the petitioner did not suffer any other unwarranted situations causing embarrassment to him or damage to him.   If the intention of the complainant as to realize compensation by picking up faults on trifle issues, we are undone. We trace no deficiency in service in this case. Therefore, it is a fit case for dismissal. We are not imposing any cost in accordance with Section 26 of the C .P. Act, 1986 for filing such frivolous complaint considering the age of the complainant. However, we must send a cautionary note to the complainant to be careful in future in filing identical complaints before the Forum lacking any merit.

      Both the points are accordingly disposed of.

      Hence,

                       O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 161  of 2015 ( HDF 161  of 2015 )  be  and the same is dismissed against the O.P. on contest but without cost in view of the circumstances as noted above.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.

     DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.