In the present case the complainant Manish Daga by filing this complaint has alleged that for sending some packages containing some garments and clothing articles for delivery to one M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. at Raipur handed over three packages containing garments and clothing articles to op no.3 on 04.10.2008 under registered Docket No.444832328 x 3 and at the time of booking of packages, the complainant paid Rs.2,469/- as service charge and Docket charge and thereafter M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. on 16.10.2008 received three packages but on receipt of them he realized that one of the packages was not the original one sent by the complainant and so M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. immediately informed the local delivery agent of the ops at Raipur to the effect that one package out of three had been exchanged and further requested them to take back the said package which had been wrongly delivered and to handover the correct package as soon as possible and accordingly the wrongly sent package was returned to the agent at Raipur on 22.10.2008 and thereafter op sent an E-mail to M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. acknowledging that one wrong package had been delivered to them and requested to M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. to return the same to the representative Mr. Bimal Tewari and stated that missing package was under investigation and would be returned as soon as it would be traced out. Considering the whole episode, complainant was assured by the op that the missing package would be handed over to him within a few days as soon as it would be traced out. However, complainant took several attempts to get back it but did not get any satisfactory response from the op, though complainant was assured that he would get back the same. But ultimately complainant by a letter dated 10.11.2008 informed ops that three packages were delivered by them to complainant on 16.10.2008 but on verification it was found that two out of three packages actually contained materials sent by the complainant whereas the third package was wrong one not consigned by the complainant and complainant claimed damage from the op for a sum of Rs.1,14,969/- being the value of the goods received short due to loss of package, along with refund of full docket charges and loss of profit. But even then on receipt of the same on 10.11.2008, op failed to give such relief and partially op tried to handover the similar type of goods but such request was refused by the complainant. When complainant requested the op to deliver such package containing similar goods such request was refused by the op. So, considering the conduct of the ops in respect of their negligent and deficient manner of service and for loss of one package, complainant files this complaint for returning the original lost package with clothes and other garments or alternatively for payment of sum of Rs.1,14,969/- including litigation cost and compensation. In fact summons were duly served upon the ops and thereafter on behalf of the GATI Pvt. Ltd. and others authorized person appeared before this Forum by filing Vokalatnama on 21.12.2010 along with authorization letter of GATI Pvt. Ltd. and GATI Pvt. Ltd. submitted written statement stating the fact that op has always maintained high standard in providing service to it’s customers. There was full cooperation extended to the complainant and issue was dealt in with utmost priority to locate the missing consignment. But no other allegation is made against the complainant. The complainant is a business man and his purpose was commercial purpose for which the present complaint should be dismissed because all allegations are false and baseless and practically the said written statement was filed on behalf of the op nos.1 to 4. Decision with reasons In the present case no doubt both parties have adduced their evidences. Complainant has submitted the document in support of receipt of the three packages for delivery of the same to M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. at Raipur and also received such service charges and the entire matter regarding consignment received of the packages at Kolkata and for delivery of the same at Raipur at M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. are not denied by the ops. Rather op has admitted that they are still trying to locate the missing consignment, but it was not yet searched out. Then question is how long years the complainant shall have to wait for getting the lost consignment from the custody of the op when it is undisputed fact that op no.1 particularly the GATI Pvt. Ltd. has admitted that it is missing till now. But most interesting factor is that op GATI Pvt. Ltd. a Courrier Service Co. has not tried to say before this Forum what decision he has taken for on the basis of the claim of the complainant. When fact remains that the said article was consigned long back on 04.10.2008 on payment of Rs.2,469/- and GATI Ltd. Courrier Service Co. supplied docket that is receipt. But till today even after submission of the evidence in chief GATI Pvt. Ltd. is silent about its return or about payment of lost article. Then we are sure and at the same time we are satisfied that regarding loss of one consignment containing both clothing was lost from the possession of the op company GATI Pvt. Ltd. and GATI Pvt. Ltd. has admitted the fact. But within last five years GATI Pvt. Ltd. has failed to search out the said lost article and practically op GATI Pvt. Ltd. has not disposed of the dispute and the demand of the complainant for refund of Rs.1,14,969/- what is the value of the articles contained in the said lost package. Practically after overall evaluation of the complaint and the written version of the op, it is clear that GATI Pvt. Ltd. has no other GOTI but to pay the financial loss incurred by the complainant for negligent and deficient manner of services on part of the op and so liability of the op cannot be otherwise discharged by the op without paying the said amount as claimed by the complainant and no doubt for last five years and before filing of this case by the complainant GATI Pvt. Ltd. though running a courier business did not care to give standard service. It is no doubt an unfair trade practice on the part of the op GATI Pvt. Ltd. and fact remains that GATI Pvt. Ltd. did not properly entertain the complainant by disposing of his claim and no doubt having their no desire to pay anything for which even after continuation of this case and till disposal of the case and even by filing evidence, GATI Pvt. Ltd. has not tried to dispose the claim of the complainant that is no doubt an unfair trade practice and at the same time deficient and negligent manner of service for which complainant is entitled to get relief as claimed. In the result, the complaint succeeds. Hence, it is ORDERED That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest with a cost of Rs.5,000/- against op nos. 1 to 4 jointly and severally. Ops jointly severally are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,14,969/- as compensation for loss of one package containing clothing and similar type of articles from the custody of the ops on transit or at any place and also for non-delivery of the same by the op to the complainant’s sendee present M/S. Prateek Lifestyle Ltd. as yet. No doubt the said amount has not been paid by the op within last five years for which complainant is entitled to get Rs.15,000/- as compensation from the ops. and ops are liable to pay compensation jointly or severally to the complainant for adopting unfair trade practice by the ops. Ops are jointly and severally directed to pay sum of Rs.15,000/- as punitive damages for adopting unfair trade practice in dealing with Courier Service with the customers and for checking such conduct of the op this punitive damages is imposed and ops jointly and severally shall have to pay the sum to this Forum in the Head of State Consumer Welfare Fund within one month from the date of this order. Ops are directed to comply the order very strictly from the date of this order failing which for each day’s delay and also for disobeyance of Forum’s order ops jointly and severally shall have to pay an interest @ Rs. 200/- per day till full satisfaction of the decree and if it is collected, it shall be deposited to the State Consumer Welfare Fund. If any negligence is found in compliance of the order of this Forum, in that case, after expiry of the stipulated date penal action shall be started for which ops shall be equally responsible.
| | [HON'ABLE MR. A. K. CHANDA] MEMBER[HON'ABLE MR. B. MUKHOPADHYAY] PRESIDENT[HON'ABLE MRS. SANGITA PAL] MEMBER | | 
