Date of Filing:17.12.2007<br /> Date of Order: 04.04.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2515 OF 2007 <br /> <br /> <br /> Pramod D.S,<br /> H.No.32, 7th Cross,<br /> J.S. Nagar, Saraswathipuram,<br /> Nandini Layout,<br /> Bangalore-560 096. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> The Manager,<br /> DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd.,<br /> Customer Care, DTDC House,<br /> No.3, Victoria Road,<br /> Bangalore-560 047. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant claiming refund of Rs. 3,500/- with compensation and costs.<br /> The facts of the case are that, the complainant had sent a parcel of Kancheepuram Saree of Worth Rs.3,500/- on 27th October-2007 through DTDC Courier at Mahalakshmi Layout branch with courier charge of Rs.20/- to one Sunitha.T Jadhav, Jamakhandi, Bagalkot District. The opposite party has provided him a consignment No.B39548870. But till now the parcel has not been received by the receiver. Even after giving proper destination address. The opposite party has mis-leaded and lost his parcel. The complainant enquired about the consignment at DTDC offices in Hubli, Bagalkot and Jamkhandi and they told that, they have not received any consignment by the consignment given to him. The complainant called several time to DTDC Customer Care, Chamarajpet, Bangalore. After 10 days they said that the parcel is lost in Bijapur. When the complainant met Regional Customer Care Manager M/s Roopa and Corporate office Coordinator Mr. Mohanrak in DTDC office, they asked him to give a written complaint by claiming refund money of saree along with consignment copy and saree receipt copy. The complainant gave written complaint on 17/11/2007 along with courier consignment and saree receipt copy. The opposite party called him over phone and said that, they cannot give Rs.3,500/- and can give Rs.1,000/- as compensation. Hence, the complaint.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. The opposite party put in appearance through advocate and filed defence version stating that, the complainant had entrusted the consignment on 27/10/2007 to be delivered to consignee at Bagalkot. But the opposite party was not aware of the contents and value of consignment as the complainant has not disclosed the value and contents of the consignment at the time of booking. The consignment entrusted to the opposite party to be delivered to consignee at Bagalkot was lost in transit. As per the terms and conditions of foot receipt notice, the liability of the opposite party is only to the extent of Rs.100/-. Hence, the opposite party prayed to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. Complainant filed affidavit evidence. Arguments heard.<br /> 4. The points for consideration are:-<br /> 1. Whether there was deficiency in service on the <br /> part of opposite party? <br /> 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for <br /> compensation?<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 5. It is an admitted case that the complainant entrusted a consignment on 27th October-2007 through opposite party branch at Mahalakshmi Layout, Bangalore. The complainant has produced the courier consignment note. The opposite party in the defence version clearly admitted that, the complainant had entrusted a consignment on 27th October 2007 to be delivered to the consignee at Bagalkot District. It is also admitted by the opposite party that consignment entrusted to opposite party was lost in transit. Therefore, as per the terms and conditions the liability of the opposite party is only to the extent of Rs.100/- on the ground that the complainant has not disclose the value and contents of the consignment. Therefore, there is absolutely no dispute on the facts of the case. As per the complainant case he has sent a parcel of Kancheepuram Saree worth Rs.3,500/-. The complainant has also produced a receipt of saree purchased on 27/10/2007 from Sree Varu Silks Show room, Chickpet, Bangalore. The complainant has stated that the Co-ordinate office Coordinator Mr. Mohanraj has stated that he can give only Rs.1,000/- as compensation. However, the complainant demanded the full amount of saree worth Rs.3,500/-. Since the opposite party has not come forward to pay the full amount of parcel content. The complainant approached the Forum for getting the relief. Though the liability of the opposite party for loss of consignment is Rs.100/- and the opposite party is ready to pay the said amount and the coordinator of opposite party office had agreed for payment of Rs.1,000/- but the complainant has not accepted the said offer. On the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a clear case of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Opposite party is a very reputed courier service, it is the duty and obligation of the opposite party to see that the consignment or parcel entrusted to it shall reach to the destination, but in this case admittedly the consignment delivered to the opposite party had not reached to the consignee and the same was last in transit. Therefore, the complainant naturally has been put to loss and mental tension and agony and he has spent time and energy in making enquiries and attending to the office of opposite party etc.,. No doubt the opposite party has come with a fair defence that the complainant had entrusted consignment on 27/10/2007 and the consignment could not be delivered to the consignee since it was lost in transit. But the opposite party cannot escape its liability in payment of compensation to the loss sustained by the complainant. No doubt as per the terms and conditions printed on the consignment note the liability of the opposite party is Rs.100/-. Apart from this statutory liability the opposite party is liable to pay compensation to the complainant for the deficiency and for mental agony, tension and inconvenience caused to the complainant. The District Forum is not barred in law to grant compensation to the complainant for the loss sustained by him. Consumer Protection Act is enacted to safeguard the better interest of the consumers. It is a social and benevolent enactment. The opposite party should take proper expected care and caution in delivering the consignment to the proper person. But in this case, the care and caution was not taken by the opposite party and consignment was lost in transit as admitted by the opposite party. Therefore, on the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel the ends of justice will be met in ordering the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs. 3,000/- to the complainant. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.3,000/- as compensation to the complainant. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.500/- towards costs of the present proceedings in addition to the compensation to the complainant. The opposite party is directed to pay total sum of Rs.3,500/- to the complainant by way of D.D or cheque with intimation to this Forum within 15 days from the date of communication of this order.<br /> <br /> 7. The copy of this Order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge immediately.<br /> <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2008.<br /> Order accordingly <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> I concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br />