Haryana

Panchkula

CC/139/2015

UNNIKRISHNAN PS - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAHARA DOMESTIC&INTERNATIONAL PACKERS&MOVERS PRIVATE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

COMPLAINANT IN PERSON.

20 Apr 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  PANCHKULA.             

                                                                  

Consumer Complaint No	:	139 of 2015
Date of Institution	:	29.07.2015
Date of Decision	:	20.04.2016

                                                                                          

Unnikrishnan P S, 2174, Sector-21, Panchkula, Haryana-134113.

 

                                                                                        ….Complainant

Versus

 

1.       The Manager, Sahara Domestic and International Packers & Movers Private Limited, Plot No.153, Industrial Area, Phase 2, Panchkula, Haryana-134109.

 

2.       The Managing Director, Sahara Domestic and International Packers & Movers Private Limited, # 15, 8^th Cross, H Siddaiah Road, Bangalore, Karnataka-560027.

                                                                                        ….Opposite Parties

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before:                 Mr.Dharam Pal, President.

                             Mr.S.P.Attri, Member.

 

For the Parties:     Mr.Randhir Singh, Adv., for the complainant. 

Mr.Amardeep Sharma, Adv., for the Ops.

ORDER

(Dharam Pal, President)

 

1. The complainant has filed this complaint against the Ops with the averments that on 06.04.2015, the complainant hired the services of Ops to move his consignment consisting of 106 household items from Chennai to Panchkula and also paid a sum of Rs.48,093/-. At the time to consignment, the Ops promised that in case goods got damaged, they would either be repaired/replaced or the cost of the goods would be settled in cash. The complainant also took the insurance for his most valuable items. On 20.04.2015, when the consignment reached the destination, the most of complainant’s goods were in a damaged condition and a few items were undelivered i.e. AC Duct Rs.5000/-, Two Iron Boxes Rs.3,750/-, Personal weighing scale Rs.1,500/- and other materials Rs.2,000/- total amounting to Rs.12,250/-. The items that have been damaged were Brand New LCD TV Rs.1,00,000/-, Godrej Refrigerator (dent of the door) Rs.22,000/-, Teak Stool Rs.3,000/-, Study Table Shelf Rs.4,000/-, Inverter Battery Rs.1,000/-, Washing Machine (Body Damage) Rs.5,000/-, Brand New Microwave Oven Rs.6,000/-, AC Outdoor Unit Body damages Rs.10,000/- total cost of Rs.1,51,000/-. The Supervisor who was present during the unloading process told the complainant that a surveyor would soon come and evaluate the damages. On 27.04.2015, a surveyor came for the survey and promised that a claim for the damages would be raised within 3-4 days and his issue would be resolved but to no avail. The complainant sent several complaints via emails and made several phone calls also but to no avail. The complainant filed a complaint with the Ops’ executive but they did not respond. Thereafter, the complainant sent a letter dated 22.05.2015 to the Ops but to no avail. This act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Hence, this complaint.
2. The Ops appeared before this Forum and filed written statement by taking some preliminary objection and submitted that the present complaint is not maintainable. It is submitted that the complainant has not come with clean hands. It is submitted that the complainant booked consignment with the Ops which was delivered to him in perfect state of condition and without any defect. It is denied that the goods had been broken and someone lost during the transit. It is submitted that the complainant about the damage of the goods during transit showed value on very higher side inspite that the complainant has not placed on record any purchase bill of the goods/articles booked for transit. It is submitted that on 06.04.2015, a consignment was booked by the complainant from Chennai to Panchkula and the same were delivered in perfect conditions. It is denied that a few items valued Rs.12,250/- remained undelivered. It is denied that AC duct, two iron bos, personal weighing scale and other material have not been delivered to the complainant. It is submitted that the articles i.e. AC duct, iron box were not been booked or delivery by the Ops. It is denied that the items i.e. brand new LCD, Godrez refrigerator (dent on door), teak stool, study table-cum-self, invertor battery, washing machine (body damage), brand new micro oven AC outer unit body damage during the transit. It is submitted that most of the alleged items in the complaint were not booked y the complainant. It is submitted that at the time of delivery of good, no protest was raised by the complainant. It is denied that the Supervisor has admitted any fact regarding the damage of the goods. It is submitted that no emails whatsoever has been received by the Ops. It is submitted that the complainant had never complained to the Ops. It is submitted that no letter was ever issued to the Ops by the complainant. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. The counsel for the complainant has tendered the evidence by way of affidavits Annexure C-A & C-B alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-20 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, counsel for the Ops has tendered the evidence by way of affidavit Annexure R-A and closed the evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record carefully and minutely.
5. Admittedly the complainant had booked the consignment from Chennai to Panchkula on 06.04.2015 household items with the OP No.2. He paid Rs.48093 (including insurance costs vide bill dated 06.04.2015 (Annexure C-1). The list of articles has been placed on file as Annexure C-2.  The consignment was delivered at Panchkula on 20.04.2015. The complainant has submitted that the items which were damaged are Brand New LCD TV Rs.1,00,000/-, Godrej Refrigerator (dent of the door) Rs.22,000/-, Teak Stool Rs.3,000/-, Study Table Shelf Rs.4,000/-, Inverter Battery Rs.1,000/-, Washing Machine (Body Damage) Rs.5,000/-, Brand New Microwave Oven Rs.6,000/-, AC Outdoor Unit Body damages Rs.10,000/-. The items which were not delivered are AC Duct Rs.5000/-, Two Iron Boxes Rs.3,750/-, Personal weighing scale Rs.1,500/- and other materials Rs.2,000. He further submitted that the supervisor who was present at the time of unloading process told that a surveyor would come to evaluate the damages. However, on 27.04.2015 an official visited and promised that claim would be raised within 3-4 days and the matter would be resolved but till today no action has been taken by the Ops. The complainant made several emails (Annexure C-3 to Annexure C-9) but all in vain.
6. On the other hand the Ops have submitted that the consignment booked by the complainant from Chennai to Panchkula was delivered in perfect conditions as no damage has occurred to any article during transit and nothing was remained undelivered. It has been further argued that the complainant had not raised any protest at the time of delivery of goods and even the complainant has neither sent any email nor lodged and complaint regarding damage to the articles. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
7. From the perusal of the email dated 28.04.2015 it is clear that the Ops had intimated about visiting of their executive on 29.04.2015 to the house of complainant for survey. Again on 04.05.2015 it was informed by the Ops that “one more survey is there to your house, recently and that is the final, and final decisions will be taken”.  The complainant vide his email dated 04.05.2015 had intimated that the surveyor had come on 28^th of May, (wrongly mentioned it may be 28.04.2015). From the above, it is clear that that one surveyor visited the house of the complainant on 28.04.2015 but no another surveyor visited the house of the complainant as per their email dated 04.05.2015. The Ops have also failed to place on record the report of surveyor who visited the house of the complainant on 28.04.2015.  It is manifestly clear from the record that the complainant before filing this complaint has sent emails and legal notice to the OPs and this fact has been mentioned in paras No.5 & 8 of the complaint. The Ops did not respond to the notice dated 22.05.2015 (Annexure C-10). During the proceedings of this complaint, the Ops had moved an application for producing the bills pertaining to the alleged damaged and lost articles which was duly replied by the complainant. The complainant in para No.3 (i) to (iii) of the reply has mentioned the details of damaged items alongwith its costs and photos. It is not believable that the Ops have not obtained any receipt/acknowledgment in token of delivery of articles to the complainant. Had it been so the Ops would have produced the same before this Forum and non-production of the same fortified the stand of the complainant that he pointed out/made remarks regarding damage/missing of the articles. The opposite parties falls in the category of common carriers, who must be held liable for loss of goods due to any cause other than Act of God, for which there is no pleading in the case. It was obligatory on the part of the Ops to deliver the articles in safe carriage to the destination for which it were booked. The complainant has been fully able to prove his case by leading cogent and reliable evidence and we have no hitch to reach at a conclusion that the present complaint deserves acceptance.  Accordingly, the complaint is allowed with the directionto pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50,000/- on account of broken and missing items. Ops are also directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.20,000/- as compensation for causing discomfort and Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation. This order be complied with by the Ops within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the Ops shall be liable to pay Rs.70,000/- (Rs.50,000/-+Rs.20,000/-) to the complainant alongwith penal interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 29.07.2015 till its realization besides costs of litigation. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

 

 

Announced

20.04.2016              S.P.ATTRI                            DHARAM PAL

                                MEMBER                                        PRESIDENT

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

 

                                          

                                                         DHARAM PAL

                                                          PRESIDENT