Delhi

West Delhi

CC/12/68

K.S WALIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAMESH AGGARWAL - Opp.Party(s)

24 Sep 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

150-151; COMMUNINTY CENTER ; C-BLOCK; JANAK PURI; NEW DELHI

CASE NO. 68/12

K.S.Walia  R/o 13 (FF), Sukhdev Vihar,   New Delhi-110025                                                       …….. Complainant

VERSUS

Mr. Ramesh Agarwal, Mg Dir.,   Aggarwal  Packers  & Mover(Pvt.)  Ltd.    Najafgarh Road ,  21 Shivaji Marg New Delhi.                                                                                                                                                                                ....…. Opposite Party

        

O R D E R

 

 

K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant engaged OP on 22.07.2010 for the purpose of moving his household and personal effects.  Accordingly on 24.07.2010 OP packed the article at residence of the complainant and transported the same to their warehouse. The aforesaid household were delivered to the complainant at his new residence on 01.09.2010.  The complainant asserted in that process of transporting the article the OP caused devastating damage to his belongings.  On checking the articles the complainant found number of precious articles mostly crockery and other articles  broken  and  smashed for which complainant lodged the claim for Rs. 2,53,825/- with OP but to no effect. It is the case of complainant  with OP quoted Rs. 30,000/- for  moving household  articles of  complainant  and for packing and storing in their warehouse for two months. On the advice of OP complainant took insurance cover  of Rs. 1,00,000/-  for the articles of the household material and paid sum of Rs. 17,000/-  through cheque NO. 333288 dated 14.07.2010 drawn on HDFC Bank. The complainant contended that after delivery of the articles when he opened  three packages containing crockery to his surprise  the articles were found to be smashed to pieces.  On 03.09.2010 he informed Mr. V.K. Vyas  and Madhu  Wadhwa senior executives about  the loss and damages  caused to the articles but did not yield any result.  The Surveyor of OP Mr. Om Prakash finally visited  on 17.09.2010  and when he opened the package, contents of each were found broken  leaving no exception .  All crockery, crystal ware, glassware, porcelain clock , giftware, Teaac(Japnese) record  changer  Swiss Swingining  Pendulum  clock were totally smashed to pieces.  Surveyor  Om Prakash  offered Rs. 12,000/-  as compensation  towards  damaged goods.  He admitted that loss was much more but he regretted that he was helpless.  Since OP failed to compensate the complainant for the claim  of                           Rs 2,53,825/- despite repeated calls, complainant approached this Forum  for redressal of his  grievances by filing complaint seeking compensation under insurance cover of Rs.1,00,000/-,  physical cost of lost and broken items Rs. 2,53,825/-, emotional and antique value Rs 2,00,000/- and for  shock, inconvenience  wastage of time and harassment Rs.1,00,000/- .

2.     OP filed written statement admitting that complainant had engaged OP to move his household and personal effect from his residence to wareshouse  and thereby to new residence in Nodia the goods were booked on 24.07.2010 as per details mentioned in packing list.  Three sheets consisting 74 items.  OP also admitted that complainant has taken insurance cover  of Rs. 1,00,000/-  and  paid Rs. 17,000/-  for premium of  insurance cover.  The OP mentioned that the compensation will be restricted to the amount equivalent to the value of the articles declared  by the consignor  in the packing list.  OP admitted that goods were delivered on 01.09.2010 when there was shortage of only one article mentioned in the packing  list as  a result  the surveyor  of OP who  visited residence of  complainant offered to pay him  Rs. 12,000/- as compensation  as a special case believing the version  of the complainant.

3.     Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence testifying all the facts stated in the complaint. On the other hand  Sh. Prabhat  Gupta  Officer has filed affidavit in evidence on behalf of O.P.  Written submissions have also been filed by both the parties.

4.     In the present case the factual position with regard to hiring of services of OP and packing of household material of complainant is not in dispute.  It is also not in dispute that complainant had insured goods for         Rs. 1,00,000/- for which he paid requisite  premium for the insurance cover.     The OP on the other hand  admitted the breakage of household articles and also admitted  the missing of certain articles belonging to complainant for which surveyor  of  OP Mr. Om Prakash  readily offered compensation  of Rs. 12,000/- OP has not explained  in his pleadings as to how many articles were broken /missing and what was the criteria  for  asserting  the loss which was quantified  up to Rs. 12,000/-.  The mere fact that surveyor Mr. OM Prakash offered compensation of Rs. 12,000/- solely supports the case of complainant. The complainant has placed on record numerous photographs  of  broken  pieces of valuable  crockery and  other antique  household articles.  People generally attach their emotions to the household  articles which are of special  value to them  despite being priceless in value. Some antique articles  damaged during  transportation  can hardly be found  these days in India.  Since the articles being moved by OP were insured for  Rs. 1,00,000/- , we are of the opinion that OP is liable to pay Rs. 1,00,000/-  being the sum insured  for the  goods which were packed and handled by OP.  Coming to the harassment inconvenience and emotional touch to the articles we feel that complainant should be awarded a sum of Rs. 75,000/-.  Since complaint has suffered  travails of litigation we  further  award                  Rs. 25,000/-  toward litigation charges.    

5.     Keeping in view the facts and circumstances stated above, we award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- being the sum insured for the goods,                              Rs. 75,000/- for harassment , inconvenience and emotional  touch for goods and  a sum of Rs. 25,000/- litigation for litigation expenses.    

Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.

   File be consigned to the record room. 

  Announced this___ 24___ day of __September _______ 2018.

 

                                                                                                                       ( K.S. MOHI )                                                    (PUNEET LAMBA)                                                     PRESIDENT                                               MEMBER