Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/192/2015

Mrs. Anju Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Trackon Couriers Pvt. Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Harish Bansal

17 Feb 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/192/2015
Date  of  Institution	:	26/03/2015
Date   of   Decision	:	17/02/2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mrs.Anju Gupta wife of Sh.Varinder Gupta, resident of House No.31, NAC Manimajra, U.T., Chandigarh.

 

….Complainant

Vs.

 

[1]   M/s Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd., through its Managing Director/Director, A-64, Nariana Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi 110028.

 

2^nd Address:

 

M/s Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd., through its Zonal Sales Manager Mr. K.C. Narang, SCO 108, Sector 47-C, Chandigarh.

 

[2]  Sharma Communication, through its Partner/ proprietor/ Incharge, SCO No. 866, Ground Floor, NAC Manimajra, Chandigarh.

…… Opposite Parties 

 

 

BEFORE:   SMT.SURJEET KAUR             PRESIDING MEMBER

SH.SURESH KUMAR SARDANA      MEMBER

 

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. Harish Bansal, Advocate
For OP No.1	:	Sh. Hoshiar Singh, Advocate
For OP No.2	:	Ex-parte.

 

 

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

 

 

 

                The facts, in brief, are that the complainant availed services of Opposite Party No.2 the franchise of Opposite Party No.1 for sending Saree to a reputed Shop namely, “Vidhi by Sanjeela”, at New Delhi through consignment receipt dated 14.10.2014 (Annexure C-2) and specifically told Opposite Party No.2 that the worth of Saree is Rs.23,500/- and paid Rs.120/- towards the courier charges. Opposite Party No.2 assured the complainant that the consignment would reach the consignee within 2-3 days. However, to the utter surprise of the complainant when she enquired from shopkeeper aforesaid the aforesaid Shop regarding the Saree, he told that no such Saree has been received by him through the said courier and even the said Saree was not available with the said Trackon Courier i.e. the Opposite Party No.1. Thereafter the complainant made various communications to the Opposite Parties regarding his grievance, but they failed to redress her grievance.  Ultimately the complainant sent legal notice dated 20.12.2014 to the Opposite Parties, but they did not reply the same. Pleading deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties the instant complaint has been filed.

 

2.      Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case. However, since nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties No.2 despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 16.06.2015.

 

3.                 Opposite Party NO.1 in its reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case has stated that the courier company carry packets on certain terms and conditions which are printed on the booking receipt or air way bill. All the terms and conditions are stipulated on the reverse of the booking receipt. On the front page of the booking receipt itself the consumers of the OPs are required to read the terms and conditions carefully, the same is written in bold letters. In the absence of any pre declared consignment the Opposite Party Company is at best liable to pay as per norms of courier industry or Rs.100/- in case of packet of documents or Rs.2000/- in case of parcels. As per clause 4 it has been provided that sender must indicate the actual and correct nature of goods and as per clause 6 in case of valuable parcels consignor should declare the value and pay guarantee charges @1% FOV for which separate receipts are issued by Opposite Party Courier Company in the absence of which no claim is entertained. However, the complainant failed to fulfill any of these conditions. It is averred that the complainant cannot take advantage of his own wrong doings. Denying all other allegation in the complaint it has been prayed that the complaint be dismissed.  

 

4.      Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record, in support of their contentions.

 

5.                 We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and have perused the record carefully.

 

6.      It is found that Opposite Parties carried packet on certain terms and conditions which are printed on the booking receipt or air way bill. All the terms and conditions are stipulated on reverse of the booking receipt. On the front page of the booking receipt itself the consumers of the Opposite Parties are requested to read the terms and conditions carefully, which are written in bold letters. In the absence of any pre declared consignment, the Opposite Parties are at best liable to pay as per the terms and conditions Rs.100/- in case of packet of documents or Rs.2,000/- in case of parcels. Under the standard terms and conditions under which packets are carried more particularly under Clause 4 it has been provided that sender must indicate the actual and correct nature of goods and clause 6 makes it mandatory that in case of valuable parcels consignor should declare the value and pay guarantee charges @ 1% FOV for which separate receipts are issued by the Opposite Parties and in the absence of which no claim shall be entertained. Importantly, the Complainant has not fulfilled any of these conditions and hence she cannot be allowed to retract from the contract/agreement and take advantage of her own wrongs. It is settled law that the standard of care or adequacy of care to be exercised by a courier shall vary with the declared commercial value of the articles to be carried by the courier and hence in the absence of any declaration of the articles loss cannot be assessed at.   

 

7.      For the reasons recorded above, we do not find even a shred of evidence to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties. Consequently, the Consumer Complaint fails and the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

 

8.      The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

17^th February, 2016                                            

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)                                                                                                      MEMBER

“Dutt”