Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/611/2020

Anand Prakash - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ram Packers & Movers (Regd) - Opp.Party(s)

Vineet Sehgal

27 Sep 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

Anand Prakash, aged 46 years, son of Sh.Dharam Pal, House No.146, Sector 22-A, Chandigarh. Aadhaar No.474514916727 Email id

… Complainant

V E R S U S

Ram Packers & Movers (Regd), Office No.10, Shivalik Vihar, Patiala Road, Zirakpur, District Mohali (Punjab) through its Proprietor. Email:  Mobile No.9216212222, 9802640002.

… Opposite Party

Per surjeet kaur, Member

1.      The long and short of the allegations are that the complainant believing the assurances of the Opposite Party to be true allocated them the work of transporting his household articles from Chandigarh to Kurukshetra and the complainant also paid the Opposite Party a handsome consideration amount of Rs.15,680/- that too in advance on 05.03.2019. The Opposite Party at the time of accepting the booking amount assured the complainant that the household articles will be duly packed and safely transported to Kurukshetra without any damage being caused to the same. It is also pertinent to state here that the receipt issued by the Opposite Party themselves in favour of the complainant acknowledges the value of the goods to be Rs.3.00 lacs. Copies of the bill cash memo and consignee note dated 05.03.2019 and few invoices of the furniture which was sent by complainant through the Opposite Party from Chandigarh to Kurukshetra are appended hereto as Annexure C-1 to C-3. The complainant was shocked to come across the fact as informed to the complainant by his parents in the evening on 05.03.2019. The household articles transported by the Opposite Party to Kurukshetra was transported in a careless manner and even the articles were not packed at all due to which all the household articles have been damaged in one manner or the other. Copies of the photographs which establishes the fact that the household articles were not transported properly after duly packing the same required are appended herewith as Annexure C-4 collectively. The Opposite Party showed its ignorance and did not believe the grievance of the complainant. The Opposite Party started presenting one excuse or the other to the complainant. The complainant inspite of the several requests made a request and wrote a letter to the Opposite Party on 11.03.2020. A copy of the letter is annexed herewith as Annexure c-5.
2.     Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 23.03.2021.
3.     Complainant led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
4.     We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the record of the case. After perusal of record, our findings are as under:-
5.     It is evident from Annexure C-1 that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.15,680/- to the Opposite Party on 05.03.2019 for the purpose of transporting household articles from Chandigarh to Kurukshetra. As per Annexure C-1 the Opposite Party charged the amount for packing, loading, transporting, unloading and unpacking/vehicle transportation. But perusal of (Annexure C-4 colly) the photographs of the consignment show that neither the furniture was packed properly, nor the same could be delivered undamaged meaning thereby the items sent by the complainant after paying handsome consideration to the tune of Rs.15,680/-, the same could not be delivered as promised by the Opposite Party. Not only this, even after filing of the present case the Opposite Party did not turn up to argue the matter before the Commission. Hence, the act of the Opposite Party for not packing the consignment properly and thereafter transporting and unloading the same very carelessly resulted in the damage which certainly caused mental, physical harassment of the complainant. This is the arrogant and careless attitude of the Opposite Party which forced the complainant to get indulged into the present unnecessary litigation.
6.     Significantly, Opposite Party did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Party draws an adverse inference against it. The non-appearance of the Opposite Party shows that it has nothing to say in their defense against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.
7.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. OP is directed as under :-

1. to pay an amount of ₹5000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
2. to pay ₹5000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

8.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.