COMPLAINT FILED: 29.04.2009<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 30th JULY 2009<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M.BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.983/2009<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Smt.Janak Narang,<br /> Aged about 80 Years,<br /> W/o. Sri.Late.TarachandNarang<br /> R/at NO.72, “Vidya Kunj”,<br /> Chinnappa Garden Link Road,<br /> Bangalore – 560 046.<br /> Represented by her power of Attorney Holder & Son-in-law.<br /> Sri.Prakash Mehra<br /> <br /> Advocate – Sri.N.G.Sridhar<br /> <br /> <br /> V/s.<br /> <br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTY No.1<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTY No.2 M/s.Southern Transport Company,<br /> (A unit of Southern Packers & Movers) Head Office:- Arunodya Niwas, GroundFloor, RoomNo.3<br /> Near Ganesh Mandir, Umarkhadi,<br /> Mumbai-400 009<br /> Represented by its Manager & Authorized Signatory Sri.Suresh Verma.<br /> <br /> <br /> M/s.Southern Packers and Movers, (A unit of M/s. Southern Transport Company)<br /> Office at No.B/182, 1st Floor,<br /> Ddutti, Yeshawanthapura,<br /> Near Kanteerava Studio,<br /> Bangalore – 560 022.<br /> Represented by its Manager Sri.Mangeram,<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> 2. The complainant availed the services of the OP to transport her household articles from Mumbai to Bangalore. OP promised to pack and unpack the said articles and also undertook to load and unload and deliver the said articles to the destination stated by the complainant. OP collected in all Rs.16,400/- towards the said job and issued Consignment Note No.1448 dated 10-11-2008. OP packed the said articles in 35 boxes and promised to deliver them with all care, protection and safe. But to the utter shock of the complainant, when she received the said articles they were in a damaged condition. Immediately she brought the said facts to the notice of the OPs and requested them to conduct inventory and compensate her, but all her efforts went in futile. She even issued the legal notice there was no response. For no fault of her she is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. Hence, she felt the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Under the circumstances she is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief accordingly.<br /> <br /> 3. On admission and registration of the complaint, notices were sent to the OPs. Though OP was duly served with the notice, remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. The absence of the OP does not appears to be as bonafide and reasonable. Hence, they are placed Ex-parte.<br /> <br /> 4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainants GPA Holder filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. OP did not participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 5. It is the case of the complainant that she availed the services of the OP to transport her household articles from Mumbai to Bangalore. OP undertook to pack and unpack, loading and unloading and transport of the said goods, thus collected in all Rs.16,400/-. The Consignment note and other connected documents are produced. The complainant expected the delivery of all the said boxes containing the household articles safely. But to her utter shock when she received the same at Bangalore, they were in damaged and unusable condition. She immediately contacted the OP and disclosed the said facts and wrote the letter on 26-11-2008. Copy of the letter is produced there was no response. Then she got issued the legal notice on 09-01-2009, the copy of the legal notice and the postal acknowledgement were produced, but OP did not reply.<br /> <br /> 6. The evidence of the complainant find full corroboration with the contents of the above said undisputed documents. Her evidence appears to be very much natural, cogent and consistent. There is nothing to discard her sworn testimony. It is a quality of evidence that is more important than that of the quantity. The non appearance of the OP even after due service of the notice leads us to draw an inference that OP admits all the allegations made by the complainant<br /> <br /> 7. Of course the complainant has sought for issuance of direction for conducting the inventory by the OP. When the goods are delivered in damaged condition to her is not known. After lapse of so many months such relief cannot be granted. Of course as observed by us the complainant for no fault of her is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. There is a proof of the deficiency of service on the part of the OP, hence complainant is entitled for certain relief. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion justice will be met by directing the OP to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following: -<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> Complaint is allowed.<br /> <br /> The OPs are directed to pay the compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand) and litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- (One thousand) to the complainant.<br /> <br /> This order is to be complied within 30 days from the date of its communication.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 30th day of July 2009.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> NRS* <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />