Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
Date of Order : 29.02.2016
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite parties to pay the amount of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only ) paid as advance along with the interest @ 18% per annum till its final payment.
- To pay Rs. 50,000/- ( Rs. Fifty thousand only ) as compensation.
- To pay Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten Thousand only ) as litigation costs.
- Brief facts of the case as asserted by the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that her husband Nitish Kumar has engaged the service of Sahara Pickpark and Move Pvt. Ltd. ( Opposite party no. 1 ) for transportation of his house hold articles. The opposite party no.1has assured that the item booked with it shall be safely delivered to its destination. Thereafter vide annexure - 1 he has paid Rs. 19,500/- and the item containing the list in annexure – 2 and 3 were booked. It was also insured after paying 3% additional charge the receipt of which has been annexed as annexure - 3. The aforesaid items were delivered to the complainant by opposite party no. 1 on 11.04.2013 but the complainant was shocked to find that many articles were found badly damaged and some of the items were missing.
Thereafter the driver of vehicle bearing registration no. DL – M – 2599 mentioned in back of receipt that the articles i.e. Deewan (3x6) trunk box, plastic chair and table, washing machine stand, fridge, and computer table were damaged in course of transportation.
The aforesaid fact is explicitly clear by annexure – 4 and 5. The complainant has requested the staff of opposite party no. 1 that the article worth Rs. 25,000/- have been damaged and hence he requested the opposite party no. 2 to pay Rs. 25,000/- vide annexure – 6 and despite his repeated request the aforesaid amount has not been paid to him.
From record it transpires that when the registered notice sent to the opposite parties did not returned unserved then vide order dated 29.09.2014 notice was declared to be valid and thereafter 4 adjournments were allowed to enable the opposite party to file written statement. Then lastly we have no option but to hear this case in exparte manner on 08.02.2016.
It is needless to say that though the annexures are in the name of Nitish Kumar but complainant being the wife of Nitish Kumar has right to file this case that there were several articles booked by her husband belonging to her also.
It goes without saying that as there is no counter version of the fact asserted by the complainant in complaint petition, hence we have no option but to accept the facts asserted by the complainant on affidavit which disclose the deficiency on the part of opposite parties.
Accordingly we direct the opposite party no. 1 and 2 jointly and severally to refund the amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant along with an interest @ 9% within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which the opposite parties will have to pay an interest @ 12% on the aforesaid amount till its final payment.
The opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- ( Rs. Two Thousand only ) to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the aforesaid period of two months.
Accordingly, this case stands allowed to the extent indicated above.
Member President
