DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.153 of 2017
Date of institution: 23.02.2017 Date of decision : 12.10.2018
1. Jeevan
2. Shivani Sharma
Both D/o Shri Jagdish Chander, resident of House No.3246, Sector 41-D, Chandigarh.
…….Complainants
Versus
1. M/s. Rishabh Traders through its Proprietor SCO No.33, Indl. Area, Phase-VII, Mohali through its Proprietor.
2. DTDC Express Limited, Regd. Office No.3, Victoria Road, Bangluru, 560047 through its Regional Head.
……..Opposite Parties
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Shri G.K. Dhir, President,
Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member
Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.
Present: Shri Jagdish Chander, father of the complainants in person.
Shri Rajiv Taneja, Prop. Of OP No.1 in person.
OP No.2 ex-parte.
Order by :- Shri G.K. Dhir, President.
Order
OP No.1 is doing business of courier at the address mentioned in the complaint and OP No.2 is regional office of OP No.1. Complainants availed services of OP No.1 for sending rakhi to U.K/. at the address mentioned in the courier receipt. Rs.1,050/- were paid as charges of courier. Receipt by OP No.1 was issued by mentioning U.K. address, where the said rakhi parcel was to be sent. Promise for delivery of envelope within one week was made, but complainants got information through OP No.2 that said envelope has been delivered at France on 25.08.2016 instead of delivering the same at U.K. address. No satisfactory reply was received. Sentiments of complainants were hurt because rakhi sent with love and affection to the relative was not received by the later. However, shagun of Rs.51,000/- was to be received from said relative by complainants. Despite sending of legal notice, no reply received and as such by pleading deficiency in service on part of OPs and by claiming that complainants suffered mental agony and harassment, this complaint filed for direction to OPs to pay Rs.51,000/- as cost of shagun plus Rs.1,050/- as courier charges. Interest @ 18% per annum w.e.f. 25.08.2016 on amount of Rs.52,050/- also sought. Compensation for mental tension and agony of Rs.1.00 lakh and litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/-, but compensation for negligent services of Rs.50,000/- more claimed.
2. OP No.2 is ex-parte in this case. OP No.1 filed short reply by claiming that he holds franchise of OP No.2 in Phase-VII, Industrial Area, Mohali. Admittedly on 13.08.2016 complainants booked a parcel of rakhi from shop of OP No.2 for consigning the same to U.K. Consignment No. N 97288683 of DTDC is mentioned in this reply. Through this reply, it is claimed that customer after few days complained as if the parcel has not been delivered at the booked address. On checking, it was found as if the parcel by mistake delivered at another address than U.K. address.
3. Complainants to prove their case tendered in evidence their joint affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and then closed evidence. Shri Rajiv Taneja, Prop. Of OP No.2 tendered in evidence letter Ex.OP-1/1 only.
4. Written arguments not submitted. Oral arguments heard and records gone through.
5. Contents of affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 of complainants alongwith letter Ex.OP-1/1 and courier receipt Ex.C-1 establishes that complainants got booked a parcel for sending the same to Mr. Kaminder Singh, 22 West Plaza Town Lane Stan Well Stanes, Thames, U.K. Receipt for charging of Rs.1,050/- as courier charges was issued on the letter head of OP No.1, but track consignment record of DTDC Ex.C-2 shows that though the parcel shipped on 13.08.2016 for U.K. (London) by mentioning the destination of London, but the same was delivered on 25.08.2016 at France. So certainly case of complainants is proved by contents of Ex.C-1, C-2 and reply Ex.OP-1/1 that parcel of rakhi did not reach at the disclosed destination station of U.K. Rather said parcel delivered at France and as such certainly deficiency in service on part of OPs is there. OP No.2 is regional office of OP No.1 and parcel of rakhi sent through OP No.1 from Mohali by paying amount of Rs.1,050/- at Mohali and as such certainly this Forum has jurisdiction. Rakhi is such a thing, which should reach the destination station on or before the day of rakhi. In case such parcel does not reach at the station of destination or is not received by the relative to whom it is sent, then certainly emotions/sentiments of the sender bound to be hurt. In view of these circumstances, certainly complainants felt lot of mental agony and harassment due to fault of OPs in not delivering the parcel of rakhi at the destination station mentioned in receipt Ex.C-1. On account of this deficiency in service, complainants entitled to refund of the paid amount of Rs.1,050/- with interest @ 6% per annum with effect from the date of deposit namely 13.08.2016 till payment. Somewhat reasonable amount of compensation for mental agony and harassment should be allowed because of hurting feelings of the complainants/relative.
6. As a sequel of above discussion, complaint allowed by directing OPs to refund the received amount of Rs.1,050/- (Rs. One Thousand Fifty only) with interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. 13.08.2016 till payment. Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty thousand only) and litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five thousand only) more allowed in favour of complainants and against OPs whose liability is held as joint and several. Payment of amount of compensation and litigation expenses be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order failing which complainants will be entitled to interest on the amounts of compensation and litigation expenses @ 6% per annum after expiry of said period of 30 days of receipt of certified copy of the order till payment. Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
Announced
October 12, 2018.
(G.K. Dhir)
President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)
Member
(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)
Member
