This case coming on 04.07.2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri D. Siva Prasad, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri P. Rama Rao, Advocate for the Opposite Parties and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

                                                ORDER

(As per the Honourable Male Member on behalf of the Bench)

1.       The Complainant asks the Forum to award an amount of Rs.12,000/- (Rupees Twelve thousand only) towards cost of the consigned goods; b) Award Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) towards compensation for causing mental agony and sufferance of the Complainant; c) Award costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only); d) For such other relief or reliefs as the Forum deems fit and proper.

          Subsequently, the consigned goods were traced and handed over to the Complainant during pendency of this Complainant.

          As such, only the matters of b) Compensation and c) Costs have to be determined by the Forum.

2.       The Opposite Parties 1 to 3 strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant and asked the Forum to dismiss the complaint with costs.

3.       The case of the Complainant, as can be seen from the complaint, is that the Opposite Parties used to do the business of delivery of goods by taking consignment from the customers charge for such deliveries.   The 1^st Opposite Party was the Administrative and In-Charge of all the ANL Branches in Andhra Pradesh.    The Complainant stated that she booked a consignment for delivery at Anantapur on 19.12.2012 and paid Rs.200/- towards consignment charges and obtained consignment note bearing No.20409533 from the Opposite Parties for delivery of certain Kirana and other household articles through the 3^rd Opposite Party at Anantapur.     Under the consignment, the Complainant requested to deliver the goods to Anantapur as her daughter was newly married and the goods and household articles are very much required and essential in their daily activities and it was appraised by the 2^nd Opposite Party that the goods would be delivered at the destination i.e., Anantapur within 72 hours.   The Complainant’s goods which were consigned having worth of Rs.12,000/- (Rupees Twelve thousand only) and to the astonishment and shock the goods were not delivered in spite of completion of more than 25 days and whenever, the Complainant used to contact the Opposite Parties, they said that the goods would be delivered shortly.   The Complainant waited with a good hope that the goods would be delivered, but unfortunately the same was not delivered even till date.    The Complainant stated that the Complainant at last issued a legal notice to the Opposite Parties on 10.01.2013 directing them to deliver the goods and the 1^st   Opposite Party had issued a reply notice dated 16.02.2013 that the Opposite Party was pursuing the matter and to cooperate till such time.   Though, the Complainant waited till date no further communication was received from the Opposite Parties nor the goods delivered till date.    The non-delivery of the consignment goods of the Complaint as per the consignment is nothing but deficiency of service and the Opposite Parties need to compensate the Complainant in this regard.   Hence, this complaint.

4.       The Complainant filed an affidavit to support her claim.     Exs. A1 to A6 are marked for the Complainant.

5.       On the other hand, the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from the complaint, that the Complainant booked a consignment on 19.12.2012 and she paid Rs.200/- towards consignment charges but the Complainant did not mention what are the goods sent by the consignment.    The Complainant also declared the value of consignment as Rs.1,000/- at the time of booking of the consignment.   The 2^nd Opposite Party was not aware what are the goods consigned by the Complainant.    The Complainant did not state what are the goods consigned, nor did the Complainant orally informed what are the goods consigned.   The 2^nd Opposite Party informed the Complainant that  the Opposite Parties are joint venture with APSRTC and all the consignments would be send by buses of RTC only as there was no direct bus to Anantapur from Visakhapatnam, the consignment would be sent to Vijayawada and from there would be sent to Anantapur, the Complainant agreed for the same.  The Complainant declared the value of the goods as Rs.1,000/- at the time of consignment but she increased it to Rs.12,000/- in the complaint.    As the goods were mixed up with other goods at Vijayawada and as such goods were not delivered and after the goods were traced and when the 3^rd Opposite Party tried to deliver the goods the addressee was not found in the given address.    The said fact was informed to the Complainant over telephone.      The Complainant sent a legal notice and the 1^st Opposite Party gave a reply to the said notice.     There is no cause of action for the complaint and the cause of action mentioned is not true and correct.   The Complainant was not entitled for Rs.12,000/- the value of the goods, she declared the value for Rs.1,000/- at the time of the consignment.   The Complainant is not entitled for Rs.30,000/- for mental agony,  as the 3^rd Opposite Party tried to deliver the goods but could not do so  the addressee left without intimation.   The Complainant is not entitled for any costs of Rs.10,000/-.   The Opposite Parties reiterated that the Complainant is not entitled to any compensation as the consignment could not be delivered as the addressee left without intimation. 

6.       No documents are marked for the Opposite Parties.

7.       The matter has not been heard on behalf of the Complainant as well as the Opposite Parties.         

8.         After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the Complainant booked the parcel in question on 19.12.2012 as per the Ex.A1 Goods Consignment Note.   This is admitted by the Opposite Parties.   But the Opposite Parties failed to deliver the same to the addressee as the parcel was missing.   Only after filing of this complaint and after one year 4 months i.e., on 4.7.2014, the Opposite Parties were able trace out the parcel and handover the same to the Complainant.   As such, it can be clearly seen that there is outright deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties.  This extraordinary deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties should have caused much physical hardship and mental agony to the Complainant.   So, she is entitled to suitable compensation.   Moreover, as the Complainant is forced to file this complaint because of the deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties, she is entitled to costs of this complaint too.  

9.       In the result, this Forum directs the Opposite Parties 1 to 3: 1) to pay 1) a compensation of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) and 2) Costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the Complainant.   Time for compliance, one month.

        Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this the 24^th day of July, 2014.

 Sd/-                                                                                         Sd/-

President                                                                            Male Member

                             APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

For the Opposite Parties:-                                 

                                      -Nil-

Sd/-                                                                                          Sd/-

President                                                                            Male Member