This complaint is coming on for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri P.Dhananjaya Rao, Advocate for the complainant but O.Ps.1 and 2 called absent and having stood over for consideration, the Forum made the following:-

O   R   D   E   R

          This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking the relief to direct the O.Ps. to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards mental agony, harassment caused to the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards damages and for loss of house hold articles and to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- towards cost of the complaint on the following averments:

          The complainant booked household articles worth Rs.3,000/- to send the same to Gudivada to her relative on 4-7-2013 and paid a sum of Rs.337/- towards charges to the 1^st O.P under a receipt.  The 1^st O.P told that they will deliver the articles within 2 days to the person concerned upon which the complainant informed the said fact to her relative who was expected to receive the articles.  Three days later the relatives of the complainant went to the ANL Parcel office at Gudivada and enquired about the parcel sent by the complainant upon which the Manager of the ANL said that the parcel was not received by them from Vizianagaram Branch.   The relatives of the complainant made a phone call to the complainant and informed the said fact to her.  The complainant went to the office of the 1^st O.P and asked about her parcel and on verification the 1^st O.P stated that the parcel was sent to Gudivada and requested her to wait for one day.  The complainant again went to the office of the 1^st O.P who in turn enquired with the ANL, Visakhapatnam to tell where the parcel was.  The 1^st party told the complainant that the Gudivada Branch has received the parcel.  The relative of the complainant after knowing the said fact went to ANL Parcel office and enquired about the parcel upon which the men of parcel office told that they did not receive the parcel from Vizianagaram.  Since the parcel was not delivered to the relatives of the complainant not only the complainant but also her relatives suffered mental agony and loss of household articles.  The complainant submitted a written report to the head office of O.Ps at Hyderabad who endorsed the said complainant to the O.P’s and inspite of receipt of complaint the O.Ps did not evince any interest to see that the parcel is delivered to the relatives of the complainant in tact.

          Since the O.Ps are in dereliction of duties and as there is deficiency in service on their part in making safe delivery of the articles to the relatives, of  the complainant they suffered a lot and filed the complaint for the above said reliefs. 

          The O.Ps filed counter denying the material allegations made in the complaint and has averred that the complainant did not pay any amount to the O.Ps towards freight charges at the time of booking the consignment and as per terms and conditions GC.No.21066401 note any dispute that arises between the parties shall be adjudicated in a competent court of law at Hyderabad and as the present Forum is not having Jurisdiction the petition is liable to be dismissed.  It is averred that the loss or misplacement of consignment is neither willful nor wanton but due to the reasons beyond the control of the parties.

 It is averred that the parcel was booked during the Samaikyandhra agitation” and as the functioning of APSRTC was completely paralyzed the parcel could not be delivered as agreed and as there is no deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps and as there is no dereliction of duties the complaint merits no consideration and is liable to be dismissed. 

          In support of complainant’s case the evidence affidavit of complainant was filed and she got marked Ex.A.1 to A.3.  On behalf of O.Ps the evidence affidavit of one G.Radha Krishna, Claims Department is filed.  Heard the counsel for respective parties and perused the material placed on record.

Now the point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs prayed for ?

          Points:-  Basing on the evidence available on record, the learned advocate for complainant has contended that there is ample proof to belief that the complainant booked household articles worth Rs.3,000/- at the office of 1^st O.P to deliver the same to the consignee at Gudivada and as the O.Ps did not deliver the said consignment to the consignee the complainant sustained financial loss and suffered mental agony for the deficiency in service on the part of men of O.Ps and as such the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs prayed for.  As against the above said contention the learned counsel for O.Ps has contended that the complainant booked the consignment during Samaikyandhra agitation and as the whole administration was paralyzed the consignment could not be delivered to the consignee and as the men of O.Ps were not in dereliction of duty and as there is no deficiency in service on their part the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

          As seen from the material placed on record it is manifest that under the original of Ex.A.1 receipt dt.4-7-2013 the complainant booked the articles worth Rs.3,000/- by paying  a sum of Rs.337/- to deliver the consignment to the consignee at Gudivada.  The O.Ps did not deny the booking of consignment by the complainant on 4-7-2013 by paying a sum of Rs.337/- towards the charges for delivering the same.  The plea taken by the O.Ps is that due to Samaikyandhra Agitation the administration was paralyzed and as such the consignment was not delivered.   It is well settled that when the consignment was booked with the O.Ps a duty is cast upon them to see that the consignment is safely delivered to the consignee at the place of its destination but for the reasons best known the O.Ps did not deliver the consignment to the consignee.  The complainant herein claimed a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards damages for the loss of the household articles.  As we have already stated supra as per Ex.A.1 receipt the value of consignment is Rs.3,000/-.  When the said consignment was not delivered to the consignee it can safely be inferred that the complainant sustained loss of Rs.3,000/- as the cost of consignment is mentioned as Rs.3,000/- in the said receipt.  The complainant claimed a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards mental agony and harassment caused to her and also claimed a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards costs when such a claim is made the complainant is expected to place cogent evidence to prove that many a time she rushed to the office of O.P by incurring necessary amounts for making travel. But except making bald allegations in the complaint she did not place cogent evidence to prove the said fact.

          In a decision in IV (2003) CPJ 89 (NC) : M/s Guru Nanak Plastic Industries Vs Chairman Rajasthan State Electricity Board Jaipur “ 9. Before we conclude, we may add that it has become a practice for many complainants in the complaints to claim damages which has no co-relation with the loss suffered and these inflated amounts are stated with a hope that some amount would become payable.  This is a practice which must be discouraged”.

          In view of the principles laid down in the decision cited supra when there is no co-relation in between the claims made by the complainant in the complaint with the loss suffered, the complainant is not entitled to get huge amounts towards damages.  Coming to the case on hand the complainant has proved to have booked the household articles worth Rs.3,000/- at the office of 1^st O.P to get the same delivered to the consignee at

Gudiwada.  Since the O.Ps did not deliver the consignment to the consignee the complainant must have suffered mental agony and discomfort. 

          Since there is deficiency in service on the part of men of O.Ps for not delivering the consignment to consignee, the O.Ps are liable to pay not only the cost of the articles but also some amount towards damages and costs.

          In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the O.Ps to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards cost of consignment and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards damages and a sum of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of complaint which includes advocate fee of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only). The O.Ps are directed to comply the order within one month from today.

Dictated to the Typist, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 6^th  day of March, 2015.

Member                                                           President

CC. 52 of 2014

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

     For P.W.1                                                                  For R.W.1                                                                               

DOCUMENTS MARKED.

For complainant:-

1. Ex.A.1 Receipt issued by the ANL Parcel dt.4-7-2013
2. Ex.A.2 The Claim requisition dt.17-9-2013
3. Ex.A.3 Letter dt.15-5-2014

For O.P:-   NIL                                                            

                                                                                                                                                                                                                            President