Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/151/2015

Nitin Ramamurthy - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, M/s.DTDC Courier & Cargo Limited - Opp.Party(s)

T.M. Suresh

19 Dec 2016

ORDER

 

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  27.04.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on:  19.12.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

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

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

MONDAY THE 19^th  DAY OF DECEMBER 2016

 

C.C.NO.151/2015

 

 

Nitin Ramamurthy,

AH 133, 4^th Street,

Shanthi Colony,

Anna Nagar,

Chennai – 600 040.

                                                                                            ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

	1.The Manager, M/s. DTDC Courier & Cargo Limited, Corporate Office, DTDC House, No.3, Victoria Road, Bangalore – 560 047.   2.The Manager, M/s.DTDC Courier & Cargo Limited, Regional Office, No.136, Velalcherry Main Road, Little Mount,   Chennai – 600 015.     3.The Manager, M/s.DTDC Courier & Cargo Limited, Anna Nagar Franchisee, S.S. Enterprises, AG 9/6, 4th Avenue, Shanthi Colony, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040.
	.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                  13.10.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : T.M.Suresh

Counsel for opposite parties                     : Ex - parte

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY MEMBER  TMT.T.KALAIYARASI,  B.A.B.L.,       

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IS IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant had sent a consignment of a Laptop to Mr.Bibeka Boitai, Konjhar Joda, Orissa, through the 3^rd Opposite Party/ Service Provider on 22.03.2011, in consignment No.D05235167. The said consignment ought to have been delivered to the consignee in a couple of day’s time. The Complainant paid a sum of Rs.1191/- towards Charges to the 3^rd Opposite Party.  As the consignment did not reach the consignee even after a week and pursuant to frantic calls and mails from consignee, the Complainant contacted the 2^nd and 3^rd Opposite Parties and enquired about the status. The Complainant was forced to make several phone calls and sent several e-mails to the 2^nd and 3^rd Opposite Parties. Though the second and 3^rd Opposite Parties were assuring the Complaint that the consignment would be traced and delivered to the consignee, it did not happen. Being frustrated with all his attempts, the Complainant was constrained to issue a notice dated 16.05.2011 through his counsel to the Opposite Party for the Deficiency in Service, unfair trade practice on their part and claimed a sum of Rs.21,000/- being the value of the Laptop and Rs.25,000/- for damages for the hardship and the mental agony and suffering of the Complainant. The Opposite Parties sent a reply dated 20.07.2011 through their counsel admitting the booking of the consignment and also their failure to deliver the consignment to the consignee. In the said notice the Opposite Parties stated that the consignment was held up at Kolkata, sales tax authorities and that their representatives was taking steps to retrieve the consignment and then deliver it to the consignee. Even after two months there was no communication from the Opposite Parties, the Complainant sent a reminder dated 21.09.2011 through his counsel to the counsel of the Opposite Parties. However, there was no information from the Opposite Parties regarding the said consignment.  The Complainant submits that the Opposite Parties are guilty of Deficiency in Service and unfair trade practice. Since the Opposite Parties have committed Deficiency in Service in not delivering the consignment booked by him, the Complainant has filed the Complaint to refund the charges of Rs.1,191/- paid by him towards the consignment and the cost of the Laptop of Rs.21,000/- and also for compensation with cost of the litigation expenses.

          2. Though the Opposite Party received notice, they did not appear on 20.11.2015 and hence the Opposite Parties called absent and set Ex-parte.

          3. The Complainant had filed his proof affidavit and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 were marked on the side of the Complainant.

          4. The Complainant had also come forward with written argument and oral argument of the Complainant 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 purchased a Laptop for a value Rs.21,000/- under Ex.A1.  He had sent the said Laptop by way of consignment to Mr.Bibeka Boitai, Konjhar Joda, Orissa, through the 3^rd Opposite Party on 22.03.2011 by consignment  No.D05235167 and the Complainant also paid a  sum of Rs.1,191/- towards consignment charges to the  3^rd Opposite Party under Ex.A2. The 2^nd Opposite Party is the Regional Office of the 3^rd Opposite Party and the 1^st Opposite Party is the Corporate Office of the 2^nd & 3^rd Opposite Party. However the consignment not delivered to the addressee at Orissa. Hence the Complainant sent Ex.A3 mail dated 20.04.2011 to the 3^rd Opposite Party and Ex.A4 & Ex.A5 mail to the 2^nd Opposite Party on 25.04.2011 and 11.05.2011 and however even after such mails the Opposite Parties had not taken any steps to trace out and delivering the Laptop to the addressee. Hence the Complainant sent a legal notice Ex.A6 dated 16.05.2011 to the Opposite Parties about the non delivery of the Laptop consignment. The Opposite Parties sent Ex.A7 reply notice admitting the booking of the consignment and failure to deliver the consignment. Thereafter the Complainant again issued Ex.A8 remainder to the Opposite Parties counsel. Even after such remainder the consignment either it was traced and delivered to the addressee or it was returned to the Complainant/consignor and therefore the above acts of the Opposite Parties  is a clear case of deficiency on their part and therefore we hold that the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 have committed Deficiency in Service.

7. POINT NO:2

          The Complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,191/- towards the consignment charges. The cost of the Laptop is at Rs.21,000/-. Since the Opposite Parties have committed Deficiency in Service by non delivering the product, the Complainant is entitled for refund of the cost of the product of Rs.21,000/- and also charges for the consignment paid by him a sum of Rs.1,191/- from the Opposite Parties. Further due to non delivering of the consignment the Complainant suffered with mental agony is accepted and for the same it would be appropriate to order compensation for a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties 1 & 3 jointly or severally are ordered to refund a sum of Rs.21,000/- (Rupees twenty one thousand only) towards the cost of the product  to the Complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty  thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony, besides a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses.

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 payment.

 

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 19^th day of December  2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 20.01.2011                   Invoice from Technology Utopia, USA

Ex.A2 dated 22.03.2011                   Consignment Note issued by the 3^rd Opposite Party

Ex.A3 dated 20.04.2011                   Mail sent by the Complainant

Ex.A4 dated 25.04.2011                   Mail sent by the 2^nd Opposite Party

Ex.A5 dated 11.05.2011                   Mail sent by the 2^nd Opposite Party

Ex.A6 dated 16.05.2011                   Notice from the counsel for the Complainant

Ex.A7 dated 20.07.2011                   Reply notice from the counsel for the Opposite

                                                   Parties

 

Ex.A8 dated 21.09.2011                   Reminder from the Complainant’s counsel

 

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT