Date of filing                        : 15-12-08

                                                                        Date of order                       : 01-06-09

 IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                            CC.290/08

                                    Dated this, the 1st day of June 2009

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                            : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                                :MEMBER

SMT.P.P.SHYMALADEVI                          : MEMBER

Hameed.A.K., S/o.Kunhali,                                     } Complainant

R/at Gunaje House, Po.Ariyapady,

Kasaragod.

(Adv. A.Balakrishnan Nair, Kasaragod)

1. The Professional Couriers,

    Teeyem Complex, Old Bus Stand,                 } Opposite parties

     Kasaragod.Po.

( Adv. A.M. Abdul Jamal, Kasaragod)

2.  Sri.Narasimha Shenoy,

     Processional Couriers, Gopala Prabhu

     Complex, Badiadka, Po.Peradala,

     Kasaragod.Dt

(Adv.Udaya Kumar.R, Kasaragod)

                                                                        O R D E R

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT

            Complaint claiming compensation of Rs.25000/- due to the delay in delivering of a parcel sent through the opposite parties inspite of their assurance that the parcel will be delivered within 3 days from the date of booking of the consignment.

2.            According to opposite party No.1 the incomplete address and the non-response of the addressee to the calls shown in the address caused the delay through the consignment was reached Dubai on 16-10-08 itself.

3.            According to opposite party No.2 they are only a pick and service agent of opposite party No.1 and they never promised that the consignment will be deliver within 3 days from the date of booking.  The incomplete address and non response of the addressee created difficulty in servicing the consignment. As per the terms and conditions of agreement liability of opposite party is limited to Rs.100/- only per consignment for any case.

4.         The complainant has produced Exts A1 to A4 to support his claim.  Exts B1 & B2 marked in defense for opposite parties.  Both sides were heard.

5.         The facts are not in dispute. It is admitted by opposite parties that the consignment was booked on 13-10-08 and delivered to the addressee on 26-10-2008. Evidently that there is a delay of 10 days in delivering the consignment.  But no documents such as phone call register produced to show that the consignee was non-response to the calls made to him to collect the consignment that is said to have reached Dubai on 16-10-08.

6.         In this case the complainant has not clearly stated the nature of parcel and its urgency of delivery.  Even if he is able to establish as to what the consignment was and  it’s urgency of delivery it will not make him eligible for compensation as claimed in the complaint in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharathi Knitting Company V. DHL World wide Express Couriers reported in 1996 CTJ 557 (SC) (CP).

7.         Should the courier compensate the consignor or the consignee the actual amount of loss suffered by them due to its deficient service of non-delivery of packets entrusted to it or should it’s liability be limited to the sum of Rs.100/- as the case may be, as printed in the consignment note was the question posed before the Hon’ble Apex Court in that matter.  The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that since the couriers liability was to an extent of Rs.100/- as per the receipt the complainant was entitled for the deficiency in service only to that extent.

8.         Again in the case of Desk to Desk Couriers Cargo V. Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Ltd reported in 2004 CTJ 442 (CP) the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has held that the complainant is entitled to the compensation of Rs.100/- with interest thereon.  In so holding the Commission observed that “a person who signed a document containing contractual terms is normally bound by them eventhough he had not read them or was ignorant of their precise legal effect”

9.         These are all being the settled views in this subject we are confined to award compensation of the tune of Rs.100/- only on account of the delay in delivery of the consignment to the addressee.

            Therefore the complaint is allowed in part and the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.100/- with interest @ 10% from the date of complaint till payment.  The opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.1000/- towards the cost of this proceedings.  Time for compliance 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.

MEMBER                                           MEMBER                                                       PRESIDENT

Exts.

A1.13-10-088 receipt issued by OP.

A2.Postal acknowledgement card.

A3.1-11-08 Copy of lawyer notice.

A4. Acknowledgement issued by Professional Courier, Dubai.

B1. Carbon copy of Shippers copy

B2. 8-1-09 letter.

MEMBER                                           MEMBER                                                       PRESIDENT

Pj/