BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
PRESENT
SRI. P. SUDHIR : PRESIDENT
SMT. R. SATHI : MEMBER
C.C. No. 186/2016 Filed on 12.04.2016
ORDER DATED: 29.08.2016
Complainant:
Sreekumar. R, Proprietor, Care Links, “Sree”, T.C 73/1701(3), MRA-207, Ground Floor, Manacaud P.O, Thiruvananthapuram -9.
(By Adv. M.O. Mathai)
Opposite parties:
- The Branch Manager, Franch Express Courier, Gomathi Nivas, 38/362, Chenthitta, Chala, Thiruvananthapuram-695 036.
- Mubarak, General Manager, Franch Express Net Work Administrative Office, 1/72, ‘A’ Block, Ground Floor, Poonamallee High Road, Nerkundream, Chennai-600 107.
- Franch Express Network, Head office, No. 199, Harriyan Street, C. Pallavaram, Chennai-600 043.
- Regional Manager, Franch Express Network, No. 41/1843, Ground Floor, Kattilkaran Building, Kattilkaran Road, Cochin-682 018.
This C.C having been heard on 13.07.2016, the Forum on 29.08.2016 delivered the following:
ORDER
SMT. R. SATHI: MEMBER
The complainant’s case is that, he sent one box containing head light (medical equipments) valued at Rs. 25,000/- through the 1st opposite party on 17.11.2015 to M/s Basco India 1005 Chennai. When the consignee informed the complainant that the goods were not delivered, the complainant enquired the same to the 1st opposite party over phone. The 1st opposite party promised to enquire the matter at Chennai office. But till 1st week December 2015, the parcel was not delivered and the complainant gave letter dated 08.12.2015 and 22.12.2015 to the 1st opposite party. Due to non-delivery of the parcel which contains medical equipment intended use by complainant’s friend was sent to its manufacturer’s rectification caused severe mental agony and monitory loss. Hence the complainant issued advocate notice to opposite parties 1 to 4 on 02.02.2016. But so far neither the consignment was delivered to the consignee nor gave reply to the advocate notice. Thus the complainant filed this complaint for Rs. 25,000/- being the cost of the consignment with 12% interest from 17.11.2015 with Rs. 300/- per day from 17.12.2015 till payment of the cost of the equipment, Rs. 200/- per day from 17.12.2015 as compensation, cost of Rs. 800/- and Rs. 1,200/- for legal notice and litigation.
Notice was issued to opposite parties and they accepted notice, but failed to appear before this Forum and set exparte.
Issues:
- Whether there is any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on opposite party’s side?
- Whether the complainant is eligible for any reliefs as sought for?
Issues (i) & (ii):- In the instant case complainant sent courier through the 1st opposite party on 17.11.2015, but the consignment was not delivered to the consignee. The complainant contacted the opposite parties, but they did not take any action for delivering the same. The complainant also sent Ext. P5 lawyer notice to the opposite parties, but no reply was received from their side. The complainant approached this Forum for getting the price of the product sent through courier and for compensation and costs. The opposite parties accepted notice, but did not appear before this Forum for contesting the case. On perusing Ext. P1 document the date on which the courier was sent is not seen. The sender’s signature and other details were also not seen in Ext. P1. The complainant in his affidavit in lieu of chief examination dated 13.07.2016 stated that the product was delivered to the consignee after 12.04.2016, after the date of filing this complaint. So he deleted the prayer of cost of the product because it will not exist as the product was delivered to the consignee.
The complainant relied only on the prayer of compensation and cost. Here the ‘B’ prayer is for damages for loss of medical practice at Rs. 300/- per day from 17.12.2015 the date expected to get back the equipment from BOSCO after rectification of its defects till the date when opposite parties makes payment. No evidence was produced from the complainant’s side to prove this prayer of loss of medical practice and date in which the complainant received the rectified equipment. Moreover complainant is asking for the loss caused to a third party who did not come before this Forum. The ‘C’ prayer is for compensation for harassment, inconvenience, frustration and mental agony. The ‘D’ prayer is for cost and ‘E’ for any other relief. The prayer that can be allowed is ‘D’ prayer, i.e. cost for legal notice and litigation. Thus complaint is partly allowed by directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and costs of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant.
In the result, complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and costs of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which complainant can proceed with further steps for recovery of the same.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 29th day of August 2016.
Sd/-
R. SATHI : MEMBER
Sd/-
P. SUDHIR : PRESIDENT
jb
C.C. No. 186/2016
APPENDIX
I COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:
NIL
II COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:
P1 - Shipper’s Copy issued by 3rd opposite party
P2 - Copy of computer printout detail
P3 - Letter dated 08.12.2015 issued by complainant to O.P
P4 - Letter dated 22.12.2015 issued by complainant to O.P
P5 - Advocate notice dated 02.02.2016 & postal receipts
P6 - Invoice/Cash Bill issued by Basco India.
III OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:
NIL
IV OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:
NIL
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
jb
