Punjab

StateCommission

FA/829/2014

Gurvinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The DHL Express Courier Company - Opp.Party(s)

in person

19 Jan 2015

ORDER

2^nd Additional Bench

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB

DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH

First Appeal No. 829 of 2014

                                                          

                                    Date of institution: 26.6.2014    

                             Date of Decision:  19.1.2015

 

Gurvinder singh, # 29252-A, St. 2, Janta Nagar City, Bathinda – 151005, Punjab, Country : India E-mail:-raja2675@yahoo.in, Ph. +91-9653-7262-66

…..Appellant/Complainant

                                      Versus

1. The DHL Express Pvt. Ltd. Co. Germany through The Manager, Ground Floor, Street Corner under Muthoot Finance, Opposite Appollo Hospital, Birla Mill Company, Hanuman Chowk, GT Road, Bathinda-151001.
2. The DHL Express Pvt. Ltd. Co. Germany: through The Manager, A.K. Marg, DHL Express (India) P. Ltd., 7^th Floor, HDIL Tower, Banda East, Mumbai (Bombay)-400051 Toll-Free 1800 111 345 / 1800 200 1345
3. The Senior Director, Mr. Greg Micheal, DHL Express Customer No. 90 Matheson Blvd. W. Suite 111, Mississauda ON Madrid, Spain
4. The Mr. Raymond Williams, Director of European Govt. Scam Victims, Compensation Payment Office Deptt., Head-Office: Camino de Mocada, 70 46025, Valencia Madrid Spain.

…..Respondents/Opposite Parties

 

First Appeal against the order dated 15.5.2014 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bathinda.

 

Quorum:-

              Shri Gurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member

              Shri Jasbir Singh Gill, Member

 

Present:-

          For the appellant             :         None.

Gurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member

ORDER

The appellant/complainant (hereinafter referred as “the complainant”) has filed the present appeal against the order dated 15.5.2014 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bathinda(hereinafter referred as “the District Forum”) in consumer complaint No.276          dated 5.5.2014 vide which the complaint filed by the complainant was dismissed in limine.  

2.                The complaint was filed by the complainant under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short ‘the Act’) against the respondents/opposite parties(hereinafter referred as ‘the OPs’) on the allegations that the opposite parties failed to verify the online papers with an intention to fraud by terming the online-papers ficticious and kept unattended since 29.6.2012 till date. They also failed to deliver the courier to the complainant after receiving the courier fee from the sender party and due to this act of the Ops, he has suffered harassment to the tune of Rs. 90,000/-. The courier fee was paid by the complainant at Bathinda as Rs. 38,937/-. Accordingly, the complaint was filed with the direction to the Ops to deliver pending courier despatch either at the cost of sender party or at his cost, pay Rs. 90,000/- for harassment suffered by the complainant from 29.6.2012 till date.

3.                However, during the preliminary hearing the complaint was dismissed by the learned District Forum that the documents placed on the record by the complainant does not bear any authenticity. He also failed to prove what type of parcel has to be sent by the opposite party after taking amount of Rs. 38,937/-.

4.                The appeal was received by post. Notice was sent to the appellant. It was served on 11.7.2014 for 8.8.2014. AD was received back but the appellant did not appear. Another notice was sent for 15.1.2015, AD duly issued received back but none appeared on behalf of the appellant.

5.                We have gone through the order passed by the learned District Forum and the grounds of appeal. It has been stated that the respondents did nothing to deliver his pending courier by getting the fee of Rs. 38,937/- as directed by them as courier services were solicited from respondent No. 1.  The District Forum has wrongly dismissed the complaint, therefore, the direction be passed to the District Forum to admit the appeal and decide it on merits.

6.                As per the averments stated in the grounds of appeal and as are borne from the order passed by the District Forum, the complainant is seeking courier services from the Ops. He has alleged that he had paid Rs. 38,937/- to the Ops but alongwith the appeal he has not placed any bank instrument or receipt vide which such a payment was made to the Ops and how the Ops will be bound to effect the courier delivery without any evidence of the complainant to pay 550 Euro i.e. Rs. 38,937.38p. As the appellant has not appeared to convince before this Commission how and in what manner he had paid the amount and how the Ops are to render the courier services in his favour, therefore, the learned District Forum was justified to dismiss the complaint in limine in case the basic documents are not placed on the record for admission of the complaint. Therefore, we are of the opinion that no case is made out for admission of the appeal. It is dismissed in limine.

7.                The arguments in this appeal were heard on 15.1.2015 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties as per rules.

 

 (Gurcharan Singh Saran)

Presiding Judicial Member

 

January 19, 2015.                                                                                                                                                       (Jasbir Singh Gill)

as                                                                                                                                                                                               Member