BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE.
DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF APRIL 2022
PRESENT
MR. RAVISHANKAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI : MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 1316/2014
Sea Bird Express Cargo, No.26, 2nd Cross, Sriram Temple Building, Next to Sangli Bank, Gandhinagar, Bangalore 560 009, Rep. by its Proprietor Sri H.C. Nagarajaiah. (By Sri S. Raju) | ……Appellant/s |
V/s
Sri Ramadas, Age Major, Proprietor, Vinayaka Electricals, R/o TMC Complex, Ankola, Uttar Kannada District. (Served absent) | ..…Respondent/s |
ORDER
MR. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. The appellant/Opposite Party has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.26.04.2014 passed in CC.No.61/2014 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karwar.
2. The facts leading to the appeal are as hereunder;
It is the case of the complainant that on 16.11.2013 the complainant had purchased some electrical items from Pan Switch Gears by paying Rs.20,976/- under Bill No.7904 and the said items were dispatched to his address at Ankola through Opposite Party courier, but, the Opposite Party failed to deliver the said items. The complainant made enquire through several phone calls with respect to the non-delivery of the said items, hence, the complainant alleged deficiency in service and filed a complaint before the District Commission. After trail, the District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the Opposite Party to pay Rs.20,976/- with compensation and costs.
3. Aggrieved by the said Order, the appellant/Opposite Party is in appeal. Heard the arguments.
4. On going through the memorandum of appeal and the order passed by the District Commission and the documents produced before this Commission, we noticed that the complainant placed an order of delivery of the electrical items at Opposite Party which supposed to be delivered to his address at Ankola. After receipt of the items, the appellant did not deliver the articles to the address shown in the receipt issued by the appellant against which the complainant alleged deficiency in service and filed a complaint. After filing the complaint before the District Commission, the appellant not appeared and took any defence against the allegations made by the respondent. On going through the documents produced by the complainant, the District Commission arrived at a conclusion that the Opposite Party rendered deficiency in service in not delivering the items to the address of the complainant. In order to establish that the items were electrical items, the complainant has produced the receipt for purchase of the said items at Pan Switch Gears, Bangalore, but, that was not disputed. During the course of the arguments, it is admitted that it was not delivered by the appellant. Such being the case, the appellant has to compensate monetarily to the lost articles. The District Commission has rightly appreciated the facts of the complaint and allowed the complaint. We found that there is no error in the order passed by the District Commission. Hence, the following;
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the District Commission for disbursement of the same to the complainant.
Forward free copies to both parties.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
KCS*
