Order No. 9 dt. 12/03/2020
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is the owner of a musical instrument shop named ‘M/s Star Musical String’. The complainant during the course of his business and for supplying the string to o.p. no.2 sought for courier service from o.p. no.1. The complainant on 17.5.19 sent two parcels to Bina Music Stores, G.S. Road, Shillong through o.p. no.1 being the courier of the said consignment. The complainant paid the charges of Rs.455/-. Subsequently the complainant made enquiry of o.p. no.2 regarding the fate of the delivery of the goods through the courier since the complainant was informed by o.p. no.2 and they have received the consignment weighing 3 kg 700 gm out of the total 9 kg 900 gm. The complainant has further stated that since 6 kg 200 gm of musical string was missing, the complainant contacted the o.p. no.1, but o.p. no.1 in spite of non delivery of the string weighing 6 kg 200 gm was not informed to the complainant. The complainant on his enquiry and after coming to know of the fate of the said consignment asked for refund of the price of the said consignment which was found missing. The o.p. no.1 did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The complainant further sent a lawyer’s letter demanding the amount from o.p. no.1 regarding the value of the missing string. The o.p. no.1 in spite of receiving the letter did not comply the request of the complainant. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.p. no.1 to pay the amount of Rs.12,055/- being the value of the missing string as well as compensation and litigation cost.
The complainant sent notice to o.p. no.1 but o.p. no.1 refused to accept the notice, as such, it was considered as the good service was made upon o.p. no.1. Since in spite of service of notice along with copy of the petition o.p. no.1 failed to appear, as such, the case has proceeded ex parte against o.p. no.1.
The o.p. no.2 contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that they received 3 kg 700 gm string and they paid the price of the said string to the complainant. The complainant has not raised any dispute with regard to the claim against o.p. no.2. The complainant has only claimed against o.p. no.1 who failed to provide the price of the missing string to the complainant.
The complainant has filed evidence on affidavit whereby he stated that he is the owner of a musical instrument shop named ‘M/s Star Musical String’. The complainant during the course of his business and for supplying the string to o.p. no.2 sought for courier service from o.p. no.1. The complainant on 17.5.19 sent two parcels to Bina Music Stores, G.S. Road, Shillong through o.p. no.1 being the courier of the said consignment. The complainant paid the charges of Rs.455/-. Subsequently the complainant made enquiry of o.p. no.2 regarding the fate of the delivery of the goods through the courier since the complainant was informed by o.p. no.2 and they have received the consignment weighing 3 kg 700 gm out of the total 9 kg 900 gm. The complainant has further stated that since 6 kg 200 gm of musical string was missing, the complainant contacted the o.p. no.1, but o.p. no.1 in spite of non delivery of the string weighing 6 kg 200 gm was not informed to the complainant. The complainant on his enquiry and after coming to know of the fate of the said consignment asked for refund of the price of the said consignment which was found missing. The o.p. no.1 did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The complainant has further sent a lawyer’s letter demanding the amount from o.p. no.1 regarding the value of the missing string. The o.p. no.1 in spite of receiving the letter did not comply the request of the complainant. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case.
The complainant has also filed documents to show that the service of o.p. no.1 was availed of by paying the necessary charges. The evidence adduced by the complainant has remained unchallenged and in spite of intimation to o.p. no.1 by the complainant o.p. did not take any effective step for providing the price of the said articles which was lost. In view of the said fact we hold that there is deficiency in service on the part of o.p. no.1 and the complainant will be entitled to get the price of the said missing string as well as compensation and litigation cost. Thus, the case is disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.272/2019 is allowed ex parte with cost against the o.p. no.1 and dismissed on contest without cost against the o.p. no.2. The o.p. no.1 is directed to pay the amount of Rs.12,055/- (Rupees twelve thousand fifty five) only to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
