Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/67/2018

Devarajan s/o.J.Goplakrishnan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manageing Director T.N.co-operative milk producers federation Limited - Opp.Party(s)

party in person

03 Jun 2019

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  02.03.2018

                                                               Order pronounced on:  03.06.2019

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT:  TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL -  PRESIDENT

 

TMT.P.V.JEYANTHI B.A., MEMBER - I

 

MONDAY  THE 03^rd  DAY OF JUNE 2019

 

C.C.NO.67/2018

 

G.Devarajan,

Son of Late.J.Gopalakrishnan,

No.25/12, Sathyanarayan Street,

Sembium, Chennai – 600 011.

                                                                                        …..Complainant

 ..Vs..

1.The Managing Director,

Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.,

“Aavin Illam”, Madhavaram Milk Colony,

Chennai – 51.

 

2.The General Manager (Marketing),

Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.,

“Aavin Illam”, Madhavaram Milk Colony,

Chennai – 51.

 

3.The Joint Managing Director,

Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.,

“Aavin” No.29 & 30, Industrial Estate,

Ambattur, Chennai – 98.

 

4.The DGM Marketing,

Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.,

“Aavin” No.2, Pasumpon Muthuramalingarnar Salai,

Nandanam, Chennai – 35.

 

 

5.The Manager/Zonal Officer,

“Aavin” Zonal Officer,

88/99 Saraswathi  Square, Perambur High Road,

Perambur, Chennai – 11.

 

 

.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                 : 24.07.2018

Counsel for Complainant                      : Party in Person

 

Counsel for    opposite parties                  : M/s. T.K. Ashok Kumar

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL

          This complaint is filed by the complainant to dire the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation with cost of complaint  u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant is the customer purchasing the milk card of the opposite party for the last 7 years and getting the orange colour card by paying advance amount 45 days earlier. On 12.01.2018 at about 10.15 hrs with the intention of renewing the three cards of orange colour (full cream milk) the complainant  went to the Regional Office at Perambur of the 5^th opposite party at Booth No.254, it was informed that there will be no issue of milk card on 12.01.2018. Further the employee of Aavin  office of the 5^th opposite party said that the booth account and the 5^th opposite party office account could not be maintained independently and therefore the milk cards pertaining to the booth No.254 will be sent to the booth itself and the same can be received at 2.00 p.m. Even  though the complainant renewed his milk card with the 5^th opposite party, so all of a sudden refused to renew the milk card of the complainant on 12.01.2018 and the 5^th opposite party directed the complainant, not to come to this office on 12^th of every month. But it is the duty cast upon the 5^th opposite party to renew milk card on or between 1 to 15^th day of every month except holidays. It is also bound on duty of the 5^th opposite party to issue milk card at the zonal office on 4^th and 12^th day of every month. While issuing the milk card to aged people on the said days at local area milk booths but the 5^th opposite party refused to do the same which is severe  violation and deficiency  is service to their  customers including myself they issue milk cards only between 9am to 1pm in the morning and later they are not issuing the same during after lunch and that also forms part of service deficiency. The complainant reached the booth No.254 at about 1.00 pm after finishing his work to procure the card. He was disappointed to hear that the person manning the booth had left at 12.45 pm and the complainant had wasted so much of time to reach the place to get the card and thereby suffered mental agony and tension. The complainant has not been issued with the milk card at the office of the 5^th opposite party and Regional Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Aavin in respect of Booth.No.254 on 12.01.2018 and further the booth was also closed before 1.00 pm denying the customers the opportunity to purchase the card causing inconvenience and mental agony to that. The complainant had written a communication to the Regional Office of the 5^th opposite party on 15.02.2018 that receipt should be issued for the purchase of half liter milk card and the regional office of the 5^th opposite party replied that since the customers have not been issued with the receipt for past several years in respect of the milk card purchased by them. The 4^th opposite party in his letter dated 05.12.2018 had not even expressed regret for the happenings on 12.01.2018 but audaciously replied that the opposite party will be conducting the affairs only in this manner and that a customer only should adjust to the events which is far from service but only considered as harassment. Hence the complaint.

2. The complainant had come forward with his respective proof affidavit and documents. Ex.A1 to Ex.A7 were marked on the side of the complainant

3. The   1^st & 2^nd opposite parties were called absent and they were was set ex-parte on 18.02.2019. The 3^rd, 4^th & 5^th opposite parties were  also called absent and set ex-parte on 28.08.2018.

          4. The written arguments of the complainant is filed and the oral argument was heard.         

5. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

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

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

6. POINT NO :1 

          The complainant  is a regular customer in purchasing the  milk card (Orange Card)  by paying  advance amount  45 days earlier from the opposite party   for the last 7 years.  When the complainant  went to renew  three cards of orange colour on 12.01.2018 at the 5^th opposite party’s  place i.e. Zonal  Office  at Booth No.254, he was refused for renewal when there is an order of issuing the cards from 1^st till 15^th of every month except holidays. The complainant was also informed that the cards can be received till 2.00p.m  in the respective booth itself. The complainant alleges that he reached the respective booth No.254 at about 1.00 p.m. for procuring the card, he came to know that the person incharge of the booth had already left at 12.45p.m. The complainant claims compensation  for the opposite party’s  negligent in their duty  by  not  issuing  the milk card on 12.01.2018 and when he reached the booth No.254, he found the booth was closed on 12.01.2018  before 1.00p.m.  Ex.A1 is the representation sent to all the opposite parties.  Ex.A2 is the letter from 4^th opposite party by giving general reply but there is no denial as to their staff’s absence during working time as alleged by the complainant in Ex.A1 and non-issuance of milk card during working hours at booth No.254.  Hence complainant’s contention has to be accepted as true and it also goes to show that the booth workers are negligent in duty and not supervised by the other opposite parties   which made the consumers like complainant to suffer mental agony.

07. Ex.A3 is the request given by the complainant to the 5^th opposite party to issue  receipt for the milk cards.  Ex.A4 to Ex.A6 are the Milk Card Copies of the complainant.  The complainant holding the milk cards of three in number is proved by the said documents. The reply in Ex.A7 reveals that the milk card is issued to its customers only on receipt of payment.  While so, the milk card itself is the proof for receipt of money. If another receipt is issued as requested by the complainant,  it will amount to  supply of double receipt. Hence this part of the complaint is not sustainable and hence there is no negligence on the part of the opposite parties so far as the later part of the complaint is concerned. 

08. Notice to opposite parties 3 to 5 was served but they failed to appear before this forum on 28.08.2018.  They were called absent and set ex-parte. The notice was served to 1^st & 2^nd opposite parties on the subsequent dates, and opposite parties 3 to 5 who were set ex-parte already, preferred set aside petitions along with written version of  opposite parties 1 to 5 signed by 5^th opposite party on behalf of opposite parties 1 to 4 on 10.12.2018  and those petitions are numbered as CMP139/18 and 140/18. Both were  ordered on condition to pay the cost of  Rs.1,000/-  on a specified day but opposite parties 3 to 5   have failed to pay the cost and subsequently in view of the same, the above said petitions were dismissed and again this forum has indicated to file a separate written version by opposite parties 1 & 2, who were on record and had given sufficient  opportunity. But they have failed to file a written version and were set ex-parte. Therefore the contention of the complainant was heard and decided accordingly.

09. POINT NO:2

Since it is decided in point No.1 as there is negligence  in service so far as  the first  part of the complaint is concerned, this forum decides as fit to order Rs.10,000/- as compensation  for mental agony caused to the complainant by opposite parties negligence act besides a sum  of Rs.2,500/- for costs.                        

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties jointly or severally are directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000 /-(Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant  as compensation for mental agony besides a sum of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two  thousand and five hundred only) towards costs.

The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of the payment.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 03^rd  day of June 2019.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 12.01.2018                   Xerox copy of Representation to the opposite  party’s with Speed Post Receipts                

Ex.A2 dated 05.02.2018                            4^th opposite party reply letter

 

Ex.A3 dated 15.02.2018                   Representation to the 5^th opposite party with Speed Post Receipts

 

Ex.A4 dated  Dec 17 to Jam 18                  3 Nos. Aavin Milk Card

 

Ex.A5 dated Jan 18 to Feb 18          3 Nos. Aavin Milk Card

 

Ex.A6 dated Feb 18 to Mar 18                   3 Nos. Aavin Milk Card

 

Ex.A7 dated 20.02.2018                   5^th opposite party reply letter.

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE   OPPOSITE PARTIES:

 

                                      ….. NIL ……..

 

 

MEMBER – I                                                               PRESIDENT