West Bengal

Siliguri

57/S/2013

SRI PRANAB CHANDA, - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE BRANCH MANAGER, - Opp.Party(s)

10 Mar 2016

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE LD. DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT S I L I G U R I.

 

CONSUMER CASE NO. : 57/S/2013.                  DATED : 10.03.2016.            

 

 

BEFORE  PRESIDENT              : SRI BISWANATH DE,

                                                              President, D.C.D.R.F., Siliguri.

 

                      MEMBERS              : SMT. PPRATITI BHATTACHARYYA &                     

                                                              SRI PABITRA MAJUMDAR.

 

COMPLAINANT                 : SRI PRANAB CHANDA,  

  S/O Sri Prafulla Kumar Chanda,

  Resident of Monsij Electro System,

  Rabindra Nagar Main Road,

  P.O.- Rabindra Sarani, P.S.- Siliguri,

  Dist.- Darjeeling.

                                                              

O.P.                                       : THE BRANCH MANAGER,

  DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd.,

  Hill Curt Road,

  Near M.B, Mukherjee Nursing Home, 

  P.O. & P.S.- Siliguri, Dist.- Darjeeling.

 

            Proforma OP                      : PROPRIETOR OF MAHAMAYA STORES,

  Rabrindra Nagar Main Road,

  P.O.- Rabindra Nagar, P.S.- Siliguri,

  Dist.- Darjeeling.

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT         : Sri Sandip Mandal, Adv.

 

 

J U D G E M E N T

 

 

 

 

Sri Biswanath De, Ld. President.

 

The complainant’s case is that the complainant took the help of the OP for sending of one article to the client of the complainant who resides at Mumbai vide consignment note no.K60946560 dated 31.01.2013 and for providing the service of courier.  The OP took a payment of Rs.595/- and the Proforma OP acknowledged the same to a receipt dated 31.03.2013.  The consignment was booked on 31.01.2013, but the goods did not reach within and after seven days.  The complainant entrusted the entire goods to the reputed courier service of the OP through the

 

Contd…….P/2

-:2:-

 

 

Proforma OP.  In the office situated at Rabindra Nagar Main Road, P.O.- Rabindra Sarani, P.S.- Siliguri, Dist.- Darjeeling under the name and style Mahamaya Stores.  The OP did not supply the articles to the addressee as per consignment note.  On 27.03.2013, OP asked for sometime within 6^th April, 2013 to respond and to investigate the complaint of the complainant, but no effective step has been taken by the OPs.  The complainant waited for sometime but did not get the adequate remedy from the OPs.  Afterward, the case has been filed. 

The Branch Manager, DTDC Courier, appeared and filed Written Version denying inter-alia all the material allegations of the complainant.  The OP stated that the OP sent the goods to Mumbai and Octroi Intelligent Unit at Mumbai imposed a sum of Rs.9,000/- for non-availability of invoice and said sum of Rs.9,000/- was paid by the Mumbai office of the OP, but the said Rs.9,000/- has not been paid by the complainant.  OP never denied to deliver the goods to the consignor.  But it is the consignee who did not take the good by paying the amount of Rs.9,000/-.  OP is always ready and willing to handover the good to the consignee after receiving of the said sum of Rs.9,000/-.  Accordingly, this OP prays for dismissal of the complaint.             

 

Points for decision

 

1.       Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs ?

2.       Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?               

 

Complainant has filed the following documents :-

1.       Xerox copy of consignment booking not being no. K60946560.

2.       Xerox copy of Tax Invoice of Monsij Electro System, dated 31.01.2013.

3.       Xerox copy of letter dated 25.02.2013 sent by Pranab Kumar Chanda to the OP.

4.       Xerox copy of Postal Receipt - 2.

5.       Xerox copy of letter dated 27.03.2013 sent by Nagraj. V Senior executive customer support, corporate office Bangalore of D.T.D.C. Courier and Cargo Ltd. to the complainant.

6.       Original copy of lawyer’s notice dated 27.02.2013.   

 

Contd…….P/3

-:3:-

 

Complainant has filed Examination-in-Chief.

OP has also filed Affidavit cum Examination in chief.

         

Decision with reason.

 

          All the issues are taken up together for the brevity and convenience of discussion.

It is admitted position that the goods were given to the OP for sending the same to the addressee given by the complainant.  Complainant states that good had not delivered.  OP states that they have paid Rs.9,000/- to the Police Department as Octroi charge.  Reason of not delivering the goods as stated by OP is non-payment of Octroi Tax of Maharashtra. 

The complainant has filed one document which shows complainant has paid Rs.595/- to OP as a charge for carrying the goods to Mumbai.

After scrutinising the document it appears that OP did not file any document to show that Maharashtra Octroi Police demanded Rs.9,000/-.  Merely oral statement is not reliable as per facts of this case.  In spite of letter issued by the complainant and the OP addressed to Pranab Kumar Chandra for DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd. no other document showing demand and payment of Rs.9,000/- has been filed by the OP, nor the OP filed any letter showing that they previously informed the complainant regarding payment of Octroi charge.  Thus the conduct of the OP is not praiseworthy.  At last OP should have informed the complainant regarding need of time and before taking the goods for consignment OP should tell regarding the Octroi tax.  So, the conduct of the OP is self speaking and not acceptable without any acceptable document. 

So, after deliberation of the material on record, we are of opinion that the complainant’s case succeeds and all the issues go in favour of the complainant.  

Therefore, the complainant is entitled to give the consignment to the consignee i.e., Bandana Ghosh or to get Rs.14,500/- for loss of good. 

The complainant further entitled to get Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and distress.

The complainant is further entitled to get Rs.5,000/- towards legal expenses.  

 

Contd…….P/4

-:4:-

 

 

In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence, it is

                     O R D E R E D

that the Consumer Case No. 57/S/2013 is allowed on contest in part against the OPs. 

The complainant is entitled to give the consignment to the consignee i.e., Bandana Ghosh or to get Rs.14,500/- for loss of good from the OPs.

The complainant is further entitled to get Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and distress from the OPs.

The complainant is further entitled to get Rs.5,000/- towards legal expenses from the OPs.

The OPs, who are jointly and severally liable, are directed to give the consignment to the consignee i.e., Bandana Ghosh or to pay Rs.14,500/- for loss of good by issuing an account payee cheque in the name of the complainant within 45 days of this order.

 The OPs, who are jointly and severally liable, are further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- by issuing an account payee cheque in the name of the complainant for mental agony and distress within 45 days of this order.

The OPs, who are jointly and severally liable, are further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- by issuing an account payee cheque in the name of the complainant for legal expenses within 45 days of this order.

In case of default of payment, the complainant is further entitled to get interest @ 9% per annum on the awarded sum from the date of filing of this case till full realization. 

In case of default, the complainant is at liberty to execute this order through this Forum as per law. 

Copies of this judgment be supplied to the parties free of cost.

 

 

-Member-                -Member-                          -President-