BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL BENCH DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSURU.

Consumer Complaint (C.C.)No. 1/2016

Complaint filed on 01.01.2016

Date of Judgement.30.12.2016

PRESENT                                : 1. Shri Ramachandra  M.S.,  B.A., LL.B.,

                                                     PRESIDENT

                                2. Shri  Thammanna,Y.S., B.Sc., LL.B., 

                                   MEMBER

Complainant/s               :    Sri. B.V. Rajgopala Rao

     S/o B. Apparao,

     No. 676/S, 24^th cross ,Hebbal,

     Mysusu.

     (Sri Dinesh Solanki Advocate)

V/s

Opponent        /s                     :   1.VRL Packers and Movers

       # Shop No. 2, Sawarna Dhama 

       Nagar,

                                               Opp to military Dairy Farm,

       Old Bowenpally, Secundrabad-

       Telangana -500011.

    2. M/s VRL Packers & Movers

        # 19-20, 2^nd cross, Bamboo

        Bazaar, New Sayyaji Rao Road,

        Mysore.

(Exparte)

SHRI RAMACHANDRA . M.S., PRESIDENT

JUDGEMENT

The complainant filed the complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite party.

2. The brief facts of the complaint is that  complainant was earlier at Hyderabad working for a private company named as Astra Microwave products Ltd and was settled/living at Hyderabad. The complainant had set up his house with all facilities. The complainant submits that he was later transferred to Mysore and he had to relocate to mysore with all his belongings including the house hold articles comprising of a television , refrigerator , kitchen items, furniture, washing machine cooler, dining table, cost etc, all together 43 items. To bring all these articles to Mysore from Huderabad, the complainant paid to the opposite pary no.1 a sum of Rs. 25,000/- and the entire packing work was also done by the opposite party no .1 Here with producing the copy of the receipt bearing no.319 dated  22.10.2015 as annexure 1 and the list of articles as annexure 2 for kind consideration of the Hon’ble forum.

3. The complainant submits that upon the instance of the 1^st opposite party against the losses/damage that might occur to the items that were being shifted, a sum of Rs. 300/- was collected in addition to the other amount towards insurance. The value of the items addition to the other amount towards insurance. The value of the items was Rs. 1,00,000/- the name of the insurance company was not disclosed by the 1^st opposite party but the 1^st opposite party has issued a receipt bearing no 319 dated 22.10.2015 which has been produced herewith as annexure no.3 for kind consideration of the Hob’ble forum.

4. The complainant submits that accordingly the articles detailed in annexure .2 were handed over to the 1^st opposite party on 22.10.2015 to deliver the same to mysore on 25.10.2015 and when the goods were brought to mysore on 26.10.2015 and after it was unloaded by the 1^st opposite party only  the complainant could notice that his television was damaged i.e., display of the television being the main and integral part was damaged due to which the television has now become useless and in addition to this the refrigerator was also damaged i.e., the gas pipes were damaged badly. That due to the said damages on the television and refrigerator both the sid articles have become useless. The same has happened due to the carless handing by the 1^st opposite party. The complainant is here with producing the photographs of the damaged articles as annexure no.4 and 5 kind consideration of the Hon’ble forum.

5.  The complainant submits that the said damages were brought to the notice of the 1^st opposite party’s personnel and the same was also endorsed on the delivery slip which is now in the custody of the 1^st opposite party. The complainant was annoyed with the service rendered by the opposite parties. The complainant submits that the articles were supposed to be delivered on 25.10.2015 to Mysore but there was a delay and the articles were delivered late on 26.10.2015 late night at 10.00 PM Upon enquiry the complainant was appraised that the goods were unloaded at Bangalore and again unloaded to Mysore from Banglore. Thus it is comfortably concluded that the damage caused is due to the wrong handling of the articles.

6. The complainant submits that the television was of Samsung make and was purchased very recently on 16.12.2014 from M/s pirgal Electronics by paying a sum of Rs,22,500/- and the refrigerator was purchased on 14.12.2015 by paying a sum of Rs. 19,200/- The bills have been produced herewith as annexure No. 6 &7.

7. That being annoyed and disappointed the complainant brought the said damage and loss to the opposite parties who  did not care to the grievance of the complainant and the complainant even sent a speed post dated 26.11.2015 to the 1^st opposite party which was returned with an endorsement Door Lock. The 1^st opposite party knowing the contents has avoided the service of the said letter. The complainant also sent an e mail requesting for indemnification of loss/payment of compensation of the losses on 03.12.2015 and even there was no response from the opposite parties. The glorious silence speaks and admits that there has been sheer deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The letter and  e mail addressed by the complainant to the opposite parties is produced here with as annexure 8 & 9.

8. That the total monetary loss to the complainant is to an extent of 60,000/- and the same has to be compensated / fulfilled by the opposite parties. There is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties towards the complainant. The opposite parties are mammoth packers and movers and have branches through India and in Mysore the address as shown in the cause title of the complainant as 2^nd opposite party. And prayed for the relief of damages Rs. 60,000/- and for compensation of Rs. 30,000/- and other proceedings cost.

9. The notice to the opposite party no 1 and 2 is duly served as per the postal acknowledgement. In spite of the service of court notice the opposite party have failed to appear before the forum and they have not filed version, affidavit and written arguments in support of defence. They have been placed exparte in the case.

10. The complainant in support of his case has filed his chief examination affidavit and also filed some documents and written arguments in support of his case.

11. Heard arguments.

12. The points that arise for our consideration are;

1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of OP by damaging the goods of complainant during transportation thereby complainant is liable for the relief as prayed?

2. What order?

13. Our answer to the above points is as follows;

1. Point No.1: In the  partly affirmative .

2. Point No.2: As per final order for the following;

REASONS

14. Point No.1:-It is not disputed that there is a transaction of transportation of complainant goods from Hydarbad to Mysore by opposite party . the items which were handover for transportation are one television , refrigerator  kitchen items, furniture, washing machine cooler dining table , cots, 43 items for which transportation charges of 25,000/- is paid to the opposite party  these facts is proved  and supported by the bill and list  of item  issued by the opposite party. It is evident that when the complainant has handover the items for transportation from Hydrabad to Mysore there exists an un written contract between complainant and opposite party. That due care of the items which were handed over to opposite party is to be taken When the custody of items were given to the transporter i.e., opposite party is liable for any damage during the transit till the items is handover to the complainant. Here in this case the opposite party has failed to discharge his duty properly and thereby caused damage resulting in heavy loss to the complainant by his act and conduct.

15. The complainant by producing photo’s of damaged TV, refrigerator which were damaged during the transportation and also CD speaks regarding the damage of the is said items. It is very clearly established by the complainant that these item were damaged as alleged in the complaint. It is found to be true and convinced that these items were damaged during the course of transportation and for which the opposite party is liable to pay compensation.  

16. The opposite party are practising un fair trade practice by their act and conduct they are also not rendering proper service and they are not taking due care of any items which were handover to them for transportation here it is a contractual obligation between complainant and opposite party one has to pay to avail service another has to discharge their part of duty to see that it reached the destination. Here opposite party have very clearly violated the terms of contract to discharge their part of duty the non perform of their part of duty to take proper care and causation, in respect of goods  which resulted in causing heavy damage and loss to the complainant. Thereby the opposite party is liable to pay compensation to the complainant.

17. For the above reasons by looking at the facts and documents produced by complainant, proved his case beyond reasonable doubt and also complainant proves that there is a deficiency in service on the part of opposite party by doing unfair trade practice.

18. According this forum we answered Point no.1 in the partly affirmative and pass the following:

19. Point no.2:- For the above discussion we here by proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

1. The complaint is hereby allowed in part.

2. The opposite party is herby directed to pay compensation of Rs.

   50,000/- to the complainant of within 60 days of this order.

    with interest at the rate of 18% p.a  from the date  22.10.2015

    till payment is made

3.The Opposite party shall pay of Rs. 5,000/- towards mentally

            agony   to complainant within 30 days of this order.

4.The opposite party shall pay of Rs 3,000/- towards cost of the

   proceedings to the complainant with in 30 day of this order.

5. In case of default the opposite party shall pay to Rs 200/- per day

    as penalty to complainant un till compliance made.

6. In case of default of this order the opposite party shall under go

   imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act

  1986.

7. Give the copies of this order to the parties as per Rules.

(Dictated to the stenographer transcribed , typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on the 30^th  December 2016)  

Shri Thammanna Y.S.,                                 Shri Ramachandra M.S.,      

          Member.                                                    President.                                                             

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT

Evidence by way of affidavit on behalf of complainant:

CW-1           :         SRI B.V. RAJ GOPALA RAO

Documents marked on behalf of complainant:

Annexure.1 :         Invoice dated 22.10.2015

Annexure.2 :         Articles to be transported to Mysore dated 22.10.2015

Annexure.3 :         Bill for having collected Rs. 300/- towards insurance.

Annexure.4 :         Photo to show that the television of the complainant was

                            damaged by the opposite party.

Annexure.5:                   Photo to show that Refrigerator  of the complainant

Annexure.6:                   Bill for purchase of the Television dated 16.12.2014

Annexure.7:                   Bill for purchase of the Refrigerator dated 14.12.2014

Annexure.8:                   Letter addressed by the complainant

Annexure.9:                   E Mail addressed by the complainant.       

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF OP.

Exparte

Evidence by way of affidavit on behalf of OP:

Nil              

Documents marked on behalf of Op.:

Nil

Shri Thammanna Y.S.,                                 Shri Ramachandra M.S.,      

          Member.                                                    President.