Kerala

Malappuram

CC/08/71

Dr P. HASSAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

PROFESSIONAL COURIERS - Opp.Party(s)

21 Oct 2008

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
MALAPPURAM
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/71

Dr P. HASSAN
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

PROFESSIONAL COURIERS
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. AYISHAKUTTY. E 2. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

By Smt. E. Ayishakutty, Member 1. A brief description of the complaint is as follows. On 13-02-08 complainant entrusted opposite party to send a parcel to his daughter in the address of his son-in-law at Kottayam. The contents of the parcel were Churidar bits, Insurance cover note of his daughter's car and a previllege card of Rs.1,000/-. It was despatched from opposite party's office at Perintalmanna. The parcel has not delivered to the addressee. Complainant intimating this to the office of opposite party at Perintalmanna the area office at Tirur and also at Kottayam. No reply has given by the opposite party. At last after continuous enquiry opposite party replied that the parcel was missed somewhere. But they do not take any steps to trace out it. Then the complainant sent letter to the opposite party demanding the value of the missed materials but opposite party has not responded till this date. Hence the complainant filed this petition before this Forum alleging deficiency in the service of opposite party. 2. Complainant claims Rs.4,200/- (Rupees four thousand two hundred only) as the value of the Churidar material, compensation for the loss of Insurance Cover Note and privilege card of Rs.1,000/-. 3. Opposite party filed version admitting the non delivery of the parcel to the consignee. Opposite party states that they sent the parcel to Kottayam with care but unfortunately the parcel has missed somewhere. Opposite party contends that the complainant gave him a declaration about the contents of the parcel. As per the declaration the contents of the parcel are some cloth dress for personal use and the value of the materials are declared as Rs.1,000/- only. Complainant has not stated about the insurance cover note and privilege card. He has not attached the purchase bill of Churidar material. Opposite party contends that complainant has produced an bill of Chridar bits to make case and thereby to gain monetary benefit. Opposite party sent reply to the complainant no time and so there is no deficiency in the service of opposite party. 4. Complainant filed affidavit and documents. Ext.A1 to A4 marked on the side of complainant. Opposite party filed affidavit. Ext.B1 marked on behalf of him. Ext.A1 is the consignment note issued by the opposite party. Ext.A2 is the purchase bill of Churidar material which shows the cost of Churidar to be Rs.3,200/-. Ext.A3 is the copy of Insurance cover note. Ext.A4 is the copy of the letter sent by the complainant to opposite party. 5. Opposite party admits the consignment and non delivery of it to the consignee. Opposite party states that the complainant has declared the value of the contents as Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only). He has not mentioned about the insurance cover note or the privilege card of Rs.1,000/-. Complainant contends that opposite party has not take any action to find out the missed parcel entrusted by the complainant. Opposite party has no evidence to prove this contention of complainant. He has not take any steps to trace out it. Complainant consigned a parcel to the opposite party and it was handled by their own persons only. So they can find out who are responsible for the missing of the consignment. Opposite party failed to take care of the consignment entrusted him. His irresponsibility caused the missing of the parcel and this amounts to deficiency in his service. Complainant signed a declaration that the value of the contents of the parcel is Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only). Therefore in our opinion the complainant is entitled to get compensation for the loss sustained to him. It is calculated as Rs.1,000/- for the value of the missed parcel as declared and Rs.1,500/- as compensation for his mental agony, sufferings and deficiency meted by him. 6. In the result we allow the complaint and order opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only) along with the cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) within two months from the date of receipt o copy of this order. Dated this 21st day of October, 2008. Sd/- C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT Sd/- E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER APPENDIX Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A4 Ext.A1 : Consignment note issued by the opposite party to complainant. Ext.A2 : P urchase bill of Chridar material for Rs.3,200/- dated, 10-02-08. Ext.A3 : Copy of Insurance cover note. Ext.A4 : Copy of the letter dated, 10-3-08 sent by the complainant to opposite party. Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1 Ext.B1 : Photo copy of the declaration. Sd/- C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT Sd/- E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER




......................AYISHAKUTTY. E
......................C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI