C.C. is coming on before us for hearing in the presence of      Sri P.A.J. Sekhar Raj, Advocate for Complainant and of Sri. R. Arvind Reddy, Advocate for opposite parties No.1 to 4; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following order;

O R D E R

(Per Sri R. Kiran Kumar, FAC President)

          This Complaint is filed u/s.12-A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

2.     The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant is resident of Khammam town, is a retired employee, blessed with two daughters and both were married.  The complainant submitted that after the marriage his daughters shifted their families to United Prem Sudheer had got appointed there as MRI Radiologist and working at 32-7 Seven Oaksway, Orpington, Kent, BR-53AF, LONDON.  The complainant further submitted that his son-in-law purchased a house on the above said address in UK and he had proposed to celebrate a house warming ceremony on      30-07-2015 for the newly purchased house and he had invited his well wishers, friends and relatives living in the city at Kent, particularly Non Resident Indians.  The complainant further submitted that he was unable to attend the said ceremony because of his old age, but as he got immense love and affection towards his daughters and their respective families including grand children, the complainant had purchased 3 packets of pickles and 11 packets of home foods (Sweets) totally weighing 9.6 Kgs., intended to send the same to his son-in-law at Kent UK.  The complainant further submitted that he approached the opposite party No.1 at Khammam and enquired regarding the transport of the above said Food items to send the same to the above address and the representative of opposite party No.1 assured to deliver the said goods within four days to Kent, UK from Khammam through Express Cargo, believing of the assurance, the complainant had booked the above said goods by paying an amount of Rs.5,400/- towards transport charges on 24-07-2015 and the same was informed to his son-in-law at UK through e-mail and requested him to receive the same.  The complainant further submitted that the family of his son-in-law have felt very happy and they expected to receive the food items on or before 29^th July 2015 and they intended to serve the food items in the house warming ceremony that was proposed to conduct on 30^th July 2015 and they also announced among their invitees that the Indian Foods will be served at the house warming ceremony.  The complainant further submitted that till the date              i.e. 29-07-2015 the said goods were not reached to its destination, because of that the family members of the complainant were so upset and unhappy as the Sweets and Food items were not reached in time as expected, the complainant and family members of his daughter felt embarrassed as they were unable to offer Sweets and Food Items sent by the complainant to their guests in the house warming ceremony on 30-07-2015.  The complainant further submitted everyday he approached the opposite party No.1 at Khammam and enquired whereabouts of Foods items were booked on 24-07-2015, but the opposite parties did not respond properly and failed to give proper reply.  The complainant further submitted that with the attitude of opposite parties No.1 to 4, the complainant and his daughters family members have undergone mental agony and distress as they lost reputation in the society at Kent, UK, there is a deliberate and clear deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties No.1 to 4 in delivering the Food items in time to the destination, as such, the complainant and his family members have faced lot of inconvenience and embarrassment for that the complainant approached the Forum.  

3.      On behalf of the complainant, the complainant filed the following documents and the same were marked as Exs.A-1 to A-2. 

Ex.A-1:-Photocopy of Receipt bearing No.N95987966,             dt. 24-07-2015 of DTDC International for Rs.5,400/-, issued by the opposite party No.1.

         Ex.A-2:- Copy of e-mail message.

4.      On receipt of notice, opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed counter.  In their counter the opposite parties denied the allegations made by the complainant against them.  The opposite parties submitted that there is no negligence on their part in deliver the consignment / parcel.  The opposite parties agreed that the Opposite party no.1 got booked a consignment consisting of 3 pockets of pickles and 11 packets of Home Foods, which were consigned to be delivered to the consignee at Kent, UK, the consignment was booked at Khammam on 24-07-2015 and on the same day the same was sent to Hyderabad to be sent to Bangalore and from there to London.  The consignment was dispatched from Bangalore on 26-07-2015 at 9:44 AM.  The opposite parties further submitted that at the time of Booking the courier the complainant was informed that the consignment will be sent through DHL Courier and it is reflecting on the face of Courier Receipt dt. 24-07-2015 and the consignment was reached at Heathrow London on 01-08-2015, but the authorities of customs, United Kingdom held the consignment and released it on 04-08-2015  and it was taken for delivery and informed about the payment of £13 on the same day, the consignment was delivered on 10-08-2015 after payment £13 to the department as such there is no deficiency of service on their part and prayed to dismiss the complaint.      

5.      On behalf of opposite parties no documents were filed.

6.      Written Arguments of both parties filed.  The complainant in their written arguments submitted that the opposite parties filed their counter with all false and frivolous averments in order to avoid their liability.  Also submitted that as per their counter the consignment was reached on     01-08-2015 i.e. is after celebration of house warming ceremony, which shows the glaring negligence on the part of the opposite parties in delivering the goods, moreover, the complainant had several times sent food items through courier services to his son-in-law at Kent, London and the goods were reached within 2 days of its booking and the customs authorities at UK never charged any custom duty on food items at any point of time and the food items are exempted from levying customs duty throughout the world, as such the plea taken by the opposite parties is baseless and invented to avoid their liability. 

          The opposite parties in their written arguments submitted that the consignment was booked at Khammam on 24-07-2015 and on the same day it was sent to Hyderabad and further consignment was dispatched from Bangalore on 26-07-2015 at 9:44 AM to London through DHL couriers.  According to the opposite parties the consignment has reached to Heathrow Airport at London on 01-08-2015, but the authorities of UK held the consignment and released it on 04-08-2015 to be delivered and when it was taken for delivery and informed about payment of £13, the consignee has expressed inability to pay the same on the same day and the delivery boy was asked to come again and the consignment was delivered on 10-08-2015 after payment of £13, as such there is no deficiency of service in delivering the parcel to the consignee and prayed to dismiss the complaint.

7.      Now the point that arose for consideration is,

1. Whether the complainant is entitled for the claim?
2. To what relief?

Point No.1:-

          In this case the complainant had sent 3 packets of pickles and 11 packets of sweets totally weighing 9.64 kgs. to send the same to his    son-in-law at Kent, London to serve the same to the guests, who attend at the house warming ceremony on 30-07-2015.   The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 at Khammam on 24-07-2015 by paying an amount of Rs.5,400/- towards transport charges for the above said Food items.  According to the complainant, the representative of opposite party No.1 had assured to deliver the said goods within 4 days from the date of booking, but till date 30-07-2015 the said goods were not reached to its destination.   According to the complainant the family members of the complainant were so upset and unhappy and they also disappointed as the sweets and food items have not reached in time as expected and assured by opposite party No.1, and they felt embarrassed as they were unable to offer sweets and food items to their guests in the ceremony on 30-07-2015 and they have undergone mental agony and distress as they have lost their reputation in the society at Kent, UK for that the complainant approached the Forum for redressal.      

          From the documents available on record, we observe that the complainant sent food items to his son-in-law through opposite party courier service, but the same was not received by the consignee on or before house warming ceremony i.e. 30-07-2015 and the opposite parties simply thrown the cause of delay on the authorities of Customs, UK and the consignment was released on 04-08-2015. 

          From the above it is crystal clear that the opposite parties having knowledge about the delay and sufferance of the complainant and his family members and only to avoid their liability, simply thrown the cause of delay on the customs authorities of UK.  And also the opposite parties failed produce any evidence to support their contention, which is nothing but deficiency of service on their part.  As the opposite parties failed to explain about the assurance given by the opposite party No.1 in delivering the consignment of the complainant within 4 days, due to the above delay the family members of the complainant have undergone mental agony and distress as they lost their reputation in the society at Kent, UK.   So the opposite parties are fastened with liability fixing a reasonable amount towards sufferance.

          Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the mental agony and distress suffered by the family members of the complainant and they lost their reputation in the society at Kent, UK, it is just and proper to assess the sufferance as Rs.10,000/-.  Hence, this point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant. 

          In the result, the complaint is allowed partly by directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- within one month from the date of this order, failing which the amount shall carry interest at 9% P.A. from the date of order till the date of actual payment and also awarded Rs.1,000/- towards costs of complaint.  

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us, in the open Forum, on this the 23^rd day of December, 2016.

               FAC President              Member

District Consumer Forum, Khammam

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED:-

For Complainant:-                                                 For Opposite party:-   

       -None-                                                                       -None-

DOCUMENTS MARKED:-

For Complainant:-                                                           For Opposite party:-   

FAC President              Member

District Consumer Forum, Khammam.