Punjab

Moga

CC/16/154

Surinder Mohan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sanjiv Sharma - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Jaswinder Singh

18 Jan 2017

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.

 

 

                                                                                      CC No. 154 of 2016

                                                                                      Instituted on: 07.10.2016

                                                                                      Decided on: 18.01.2017

 

Surinder Mohan, aged about 66 years son of Sh.Kaushal Kishore, resident of Sehaj Colony, Street no.2, Backside, Geeta Bhawan, Moga.

                                                                                ……… Complainant

 

Versus

1.       Sanjiv Sharma, Franchise of Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd, Partap Road, Moga.

 

2.       Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd, A-64, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi - 110028, through its Managing Director.  

 

                                                                           ……….. Opposite Parties

 

 

Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

Quorum:    Sh. Ajit Aggarwal,  President

                   Smt. Vinod Bala, Member

                   Smt. Bhupinder Kaur, Member

 

Present:       Sh. Jasvinder Singh, Advocate Cl. for complainant.

                   Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Representative for opposite parties.

 

 

ORDER :

(Per Ajit Aggarwal,  President)

 

1.                Complainant has filed the instant complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") against Sanjiv Sharma, Franchise of Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd, Partap Road, Moga and others (hereinafter referred to as the opposite parties) directing them to pay the cost of box of sweets Rs.550/- and 10 Marriage Invitation Cards Rs.1000/-, Rs.300/- refund of courier charges total Rs.1850/- alongwith interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of claim till its realization and to return the marriage invitation cards. Further opposite parties may be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension, harassment and agony suffered by complainant and Rs.11,000/- as costs of litigation expenses to the complainant and to grant any other relief to which this Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case be awarded to the complainant.

2.                Briefly stated the facts of the case are that opposite party no.1 is a Franchisee of opposite party no.2 i.e. Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd. and is carrying on the booking of articles to be sent to various places in India and abroad and the distribution of the articles in the area of town of Moga. The complainant had booked a parcel containing a box of 1 kg sweets and 10 marriage Invitation cards of the son of the complainant namely Akshay Goyal at the address, Flat no.42, 43, Building D-3, Khira Nagar, S.V.Road, Santa Cruz (West) Mumbai-54, with opposite party no.1 vide receipt of the opposite party no.2, no.1303969468 dt. 25.08.2016. Opposite party nos.1 & 2 charged Rs.300/- for their service. Opposite party no.1 promised that the parcel shall be delivered within a period of 4 days at the given address, but to the utter surprise and dismay of the complainant, the parcel has not been delivered to Akshay Goyal son of the complainant. The marriage invitation cards sent through the said parcel were of the marriage of Akshay Goyal son of the complainant and were meant for distribution among his friends and colleagues in Duabi, but due to the non delivery of the parcel, Akshay Goyal has been unable to deliver the invitation card to his friends. This has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental tension to the complainant as well as his son Akshay Goyal. When the said parcel was not delivered to Akshay Goyal even after one week, the complainant contacted opposite party no.1 and asked him as to why the parcel has not been delivered to his son Akshay Goyal at the given address of Mumbai, the opposite party no.1 said that he is not responsible for the delivery of the booked parcel on time. He further said that the parcel will be delivered in routine whenever it becomes due. The complainant was shocked to listen to the reply of the complainant. Due to non delivery of the said parcel even after passing of over a month, the complainant and his son Akshay Goyal has suffered mental tension, harassment and inconvenience which cannot be compensated with any amount of money. Hence this complaint.

3.                Upon notice, opposite party nos.1 & 2 appeared through Sh. Sanjiv Sharma, Representative and filed their written reply submitting that it is admitted to the extent that the complainant had booked a consignment with opposite parties on 25.08.2016 at Moga for Mumabi. Further stated that the consignment of the complainant could not be delivered to the consignee as the consignee was not found at the address mentioned in the envelope. Queries made by the delivery persons of the opposite parties regarding whereabouts of the consignee in the neighbourhood yielded no result as no one could give any satisfactory answer why was the consignee's premises locked or where did he go. Thereafter a note was written and dropped in the premises by the delivery persons of the opposite parties to inform the consignee about the consignment. Since there was no response even after that from the consignee, the same was brought back to Moga at the cost of the opposite parties in order to return the same to the complainant. The complainant was duly informed about the same and as a mesure of gesture and goodwill he was not charged any return charges for his consignment. However, the complainant refused to take delivery of the consignment and has now filed the present complaint to harass the opposite parties. The consignment is still being kept in the Moga office of the opposite parties. All other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.

4.                In order to prove the case, complainant tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. C-1 alongwith copy of receipt Ex.C-2 and another affidavit of complainant as Ex.C-3 and closed the evidence. 

5.                On the other hand, Sh. Sanjiv Sharma, Representative of opposite parties tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.OPs-1 and closed the evidence.

6.                We have heard both the parties and have very carefully gone through record placed on file.

7.                Ld. counsel for complainant argued that the complainant had booked a parcel containing a box of 1 kg sweets and 10 marriage Invitation cards of the son of the complainant namely Akshay Goyal at the address, Flat no.42, 43, Building D-3, Khira Nagar, S.V.Road, Santa Cruz (West) Mumbai-54, with opposite party no.1 vide receipt of the opposite party no.2, no.1303969468 dt. 25.08.2016. Opposite party nos.1 & 2 charged Rs.300/- for their service. Opposite party no.1 promised that the parcel shall be delivered within a period of 4 days at the given address, but to the utter surprise and dismay of the complainant, the parcel was not delivered to said Akshay Goyal. The marriage invitation cards sent through the said parcel were of the marriage of Akshay Goyal son of the complainant and were meant for distribution among his friends and colleagues in Duabi, but due to the non delivery of the parcel said Akshay Goyal was unable to deliver the invitation card to his friends. This has caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental tension to the complainant, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of the opposite parties. In reply, opposite parties submitted that consignment of the complainant could not be delivered to the consignee as the consignee was not found at the address mentioned in the envelope. Queries made by the delivery person of the opposite parties regarding whereabouts of the consignee in the neighbourhood yielded, but to no effect. Thereafter a note was written and dropped in the premises by the delivery person of the opposite parties to inform the consignee about the consignment. When there was no response from the consignee, the said parcel was brought back to Moga at the cost of the opposite parties in order to return the same to the complainant. The complainant was duly informed about the same. But the complainant refused to take delivery of the consignment. As such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and the present complaint may be dismissed.

8.                We have heard both the parties and also gone through the file, evidence and arguments lead by the both the parties. The case of the complainant is that he booked a parcel containing a box of 1 KG sweets and 10 Marriage Invitation Cards of his son namely Akshay Goyal at Mumbai and paid freight charges to them for delivering the same. But despite that opposite parties failed to deliver the parcel at the destination, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of opposite parties. In support of the pleadings, the complainant adduced the copy of the receipt no.1303969468 dated 25.08.2016 as Ex.C-2, at the time of dispatching the said parcel. The complainant succeeds to prove his case. On the other hand, the opposite parties admitted that the complainant booked a parcel with them which was to be delivered to Akshay Goyal at Mumbai as alleged by the complainant. The only plea for non-delivery of the parcel to the consignee is that the consignment could not be delivered as the consignee was not found at the given address. They made queries regarding whereabouts the consignee and also left note in the premises to inform the consignee about the consignment, but no one approached them to receive the parcel. So, they brought the parcel back to Moga, but they failed to produce any evidence in support of their contentions. Even they did not produce the parcel in this Forum. The acts of opposite parties for not delivering the parcel at the destination amounts to deficiency in service and mal trade practice on their part.

9.                In view of the above discussion, the present complaint in hand is allowed and opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.1850/- to the complainant i.e. Rs.550/- cost of sweet box, Rs.1000/- marriage invitation cards charges and Rs.300/- courier charges alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from 25.08.2016 when they received the parcel till final realization and to return the marriage invitation cards. Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 15,000/-(Fifteen thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and harassment faced by complainant and Rs.3000/-(Three thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order, failing which, complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 25 and 27 of Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room. 

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated: 18.01.2017.

 

                               (Bhupinder Kaur)                 (Vinod Bala)         (Ajit Aggarwal)

                                               Member                       Member                President