Haryana

Ambala

CC/266/2019

M/s Carezone Health Care - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri Ganesh Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

A.B. Kapoor

15 Jul 2022

ORDER

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                                      Complaint case no.         :     266 of 2019

                                                          Date of Institution           :     22.08.2019

                                                          Date of decision     :     15.07.2022.

         

M/s Carezone Health Care through Proprietor Shri Suraj Kumar Bisht, 15, Near Dhulkot Gurudwara, Senanagar, Ambala City.

                                                                             ……. Complainant.

                                      Versus

1.       Shri Ganesh Enterprises 93-C, Krishna Nagar, Near KD Hospital Mahesh Nagar, Ambala Cantt. through its Manager (Courier Agent).

2.       Jet Line Couriers Pvt. Ltd. G-10, Vardhman Diamond Plaza DB Gupta Road, Paharganj, Near Delhi through its Manager (Courier company)

 

 

                                                                    ….…. Opposite Parties.

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.

 

Present:       Shri A.B.Kapoor, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

Shri Vishal Mittal, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’).               

2.                Brief facts of the case are that on 2.5.2019, complainant handed over a courier worth of Rs.13,700/- to the OP No.1, for onward dispatch to M/s Patlawati Nursing Home, Near Hari Har Dham Road, PO + PS, Bagodar, District Giridh State 20, Jharkhand Pin Code-825322. After booking, OP No.2 issued a receipt No.5408291. Complainant inquired from the OP No.2 about the status of the courier but it failed to track the location of the said courier. As the said courier did not reach at its destination, therefore complainant served a legal notice dated 03.07.2019, upon the OPs, but of no avail. Due to non-delivery of the courier, complainant has suffered a huge loss of Rs.50,000/- in his business besides the cost of the courier of Rs.15,934 i.e (Rs.13,700/- cost of the item + Rs.2,234/- as GST). It is prayed that complaint may be accepted with costs and OPs may be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- and Rs.15,934/- as cost of courier. They be also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.

3.                Upon notice, OP No.1 appeared and filed written version, raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, locus standi, not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts etc.  On merits, it is stated that complainant used to send his parcel through the answering OP on credit basis. Balance of Rs.13,794/- was outstanding, against the complainant for the courier services provided to the complainant for the month of April, 2019 and this fact has been admitted by the complainant.  On 04.05.2019, complainant visited the office of answering OP and requested to send two parcels through courier to M/s Patlawati Nursing Home, Near Hari Har Dham Road, PS & PO Bagodar District Giridh State Jharkhand. The answering OP as per the request of the complainant fill-up the courier receipts, during this process complainant clicked the photographs of the original courier receipts from his mobile phone. Answering OP demanded the outstanding amount alongwith the charges of two parcels but complainant got annoyed and took back his two parcels. Since, both the original courier receipts were lying with the answering OP and it cancelled both the courier receipts. Had there been any delivery of the parcel to the OP, then the complainant must have the carbon copy of the original receipts. Complainant with malafide intention took the printout of the clicked photographs of the original courier receipts from the answering OP and annexed the same with the complaint. Complainant cheating the answering OP with intention to grab money and misused the clicked photographs by filing the present complaint. Rest of the allegations levelled by the complainant were denied and prayer has been made for dismissal of the present complaint filed by the complainant against it.  

4.                Upon notice, OP No.2 appeared and filed written version, raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, locus standi, not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts etc.  On merits, it is stated that complainant used to send his parcel through the OP No.1 on credit basis. Balance of Rs.13,794/- was outstanding, against the complainant for the courier services provided to the complainant for the month of April, 2019 and this fact has been admitted by the complainant.  On 04.05.2019, complainant visited the office of OP No.1 and requested to send two parcels through courier to M/s Patlawati Nursing Home, Near Hari Har Dham Road, PS & PO Bagodar District Giridh State Jharkhand. OP No.1 as per the request of the complainant fill-up the courier receipts, during this process complainant clicked the photographs of the original courier receipts from his mobile phone. OP No.1 demanded the outstanding amount alongwith the charges of two parcels but complainant got annoyed and took back his two parcels. Both the original courier receipts were lying with the OP No.1 and it cancelled both the courier receipts. Had there been any delivery of the parcel to the OP No.1, then the complainant must have the carbon copy of the original receipts. Complainant with malafide intention took the printout of the clicked photographs of the original courier receipts from the OP NO.1 and annexed the same with the complaint. Complainant cheating the OPs with intention to grab money and misused the clicked photographs by filing the present complaint. Rest of the allegations levelled by the complainant were denied and prayer has been made for dismissal of the present complaint filed by the complainant against it. 

5.                Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of Shri Suraj Kumar Bisht Proprietor M/s Carezone Health Care, 15, Near Dhulkot Gurudwara, Senanagar, Ambala City as Annexure C-X along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-6 and closed the evidence of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP No.1 tendered affidavit of Shri Amit Sharma, Manager Shri Ganesh Enterprises, 93-C, Krishna Nagar, Near K.D. Hospital, Mahesh Nagar, Ambala Cantt. as Annexure OPA alongwith documents Annexure R-1 to R-7 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.1. Learned counsel for the OP No.2 has made a statement that evidence of OP No.1 be read as evidence of OP No.2 and closed the evidence of OP No.2.

6.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record very carefully.

7.                The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that proprietor of the complainant booked a parcel containing goods worth of Rs.13,700/-, vide receipt No.5408291, with the OP No.1, which is duly registered with the OP No.2, to deliver the same to M/s Patlawati Nursing Home, Bagodar, Jharkhand, but the said parcel/courier did not reach at its destination.

8.                On the contrary, the learned counsel for the OPs No.1 and 2 has submitted that complainant used to send its parcels through OP No.1, on credit basis and an amount of Rs.13,794/-, is still outstanding towards it. On 04.05.2019, complainant visited the Op No.1, to book two parcels to send the same to M/s Patlawati Nursing Home. During the period, when OP No.1 was filling up the courier receipts then complainant clicked the photograph of the original receipts in his mobile phone. OP No.1 asked the complainant to pay the courier charges for the said parcels and also to pay the outstanding amount. Complainant instead of paying the due amount had taken back his parcels from the OP No.1. Op No.1 left with no alternative but to cancel the original receipts and the same are still lying with it. Had the complainant booked the parcels with the OP No.1 then complainant must have in possession either the original receipts or the carbon copy of the same. The original receipts are in the possession of the OP No.1, which shows that the complainant did not book any parcel with the OP No.1, for delivery.

9.                It may be stated here that the proprietor of the complainant in support of his version has placed on record the photograph of the receipts bearing No.5408291 and 5408290 as Annexure C-3 and C-4, whereas in support of their version, the OPs have tendered the original cancelled receipt bearing No.5408290 as Annexure R-1 to R-3 and original cancelled receipt bearing No. 5408291 as Annexure R-4 to R-6. In this situation, we are of the view that onus is on the complainant to prove that he booked the aforesaid parcels with the Op No.1 and paid the requisite courier charges to it. However, no such document has been placed on record by the complainant, to prove that he paid the courier charges to the OP No.1. In this view of the matter, we have no reason to disbelieve the contention of the OPs that complainant did not  pay the courier charges and had taken back the parcels from the OP No.1. Be that as it may, we do not find any merits in the present complaint, consequently we dismiss the same. The parties are left to bear their own costs. Certified copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on: 15.07.2022.

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)  (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                         Member                       President