BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SRI.  P.V. JAYARAJAN                               : PRESIDENT

SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR                           : MEMBER

SRI. VIJU  V.R.                                             : MEMBER

C.C.No. 218/2020 Filed on 02/11/2020

ORDER DATED: 21/02/2023

ORDER

SRI.P.V. JAYARAJAN, PRESIDENT:

1. This is a complaint filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and the matter stood over to this date for consideration.  After hearing the matter the commission passed an order as follows:
2. This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite party alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.  After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party to appear before this Commission.  After accepting the notice the opposite party not entered appearance and hence on 22/07/2022 the opposite party was called absent and set ex parte. 
3. The case of the complainant in short is that Complainant is a serving officer of Indian Air Force, presently posted at Air Force Station at Akkulam, Thiruvannathapruam.  The opposite party is conducting the business of transporting cargo throughout India in the name and style “Faith Pakers and Movers”.  The complainant was posted at Air Force Station at Pathankot in Punjab, where he was living with his family in the service permitted accommodation.  The complainant was transferred from Pathankot to Trivandrum, hence decided to transport his household items and his car to Trivandrum by road.  The complainant enquired with opposite party about moving his luggage by road against which the opposite party had agreed to transport his luggage and car to Trivandrum and promised to deliver within 15 days, if the item is handed over to him.  He also promised that, the luggage will be lifted from Air Force Station, Pathankot and will be delivered at Air Force Station Trivandrum.  The booking of the luggage and the car was taken separately.  The household items were picked up from the residence of the complainant at Pathancot on 25/06/2020 and the motor car bearing No.HP-38F-1539, a TATA NEXON variant, was taken over by his agent named prince on 26/06/2020.  The luggage was booked for an amount of Rs.1,91,836/- against a bill No.2594 dated 25/06/2020 and the same was delivered at Trivandrum on 04/07/2020, whereas the car booked on 25/06/2020 against a bill series No.2595 for an amount of Rs.38,640/-.  On 24/07/2020, the complainant received a phone call from the office of the opposite party stating that, the vehicle will be sent to Kochi and not to Trivandrum and arrival also will be intimated.  After few days the complainant was asked by the opposite party to contact one Mr.Kumar on his mobile No.8470830007.  though the complainant contacted him he was reluctant to provide the telephone number of the driver who was carrying the car of the complainant.  On his continuous telephone call with the opposite party, the whereabouts of the car could not be traced out.  Again on 16/08/2020, the opposite party asked the complainant to contact one Mr.Baljeet, and also could not provide a proper answer.  After contacting on various numbers on 25/08/2020, the aforesaid Mr.Kumar conveyed another Mobile No.9306595161 of one Mr.Sachin, at Kochi.  Mr.Sachin was only aware that the vehicle is available at Kochi.  The very next day he informed the complainant that he could locate the vehicle somewhere near Apollo tyres factory at Kalamassery, Kochi.  The complainant being a new person at Kerala was too desperate to find out his vehicle worth Rs.6,00,000/-.  Though the opposite party undertook delivery of the vhicle within 15 days, he handed over it to various persons and agencies and lastly deserted it at Kochi.  To the great surprise of the complainant on 30/08/2020, he received a telephone call from a police official of the Police Control room Kochi on his Mobile No.9694127144, that the complainant’s car bearing No.HO-38F-1539 is seen deserted on road side which will be towed unless the key is provided and also legal proceedings will be initiated against the complainant.  SHO, Harbor Police Station at Kochi also telephoned the complainant and was shouting upon him for his omission sand negligent act violating the traffic rules, that too being a member of defense organization.  He also demanded the immediate appearance of the complainant before him.  Complainant was trying to contact all the persons whom he contacted earlier.  At the direction of the opposite party, whereas no response was received from the opposite party, but one Mr.Sonu contacted the complainant stating that the keys of the car will be handed over to him, provided he should not make any complaint against the said Sonu or others.  It is respectfully submitted that the vehicle was in a pathetic condition, roughly driven for kilometers together.  The tyres were in a partially deflated condition, abnormal sound was occurring from the engine.  Scratches were found at many places at the body and on wheel cups.  Apart from that the driver was Rs.1,500/- for petrol and Rs.500/- for return journey on 31/08/2020.  The complainant has also paid Rs.3,000/- to Shyam cargo movers through account No.169105500279 of ICICI Bank branch at Thoppumpadi Kochi on the same day for arranging driver.  Hence the complainant approached this Commission for redressing his grievances.  The opposite party being declared ex parte, there is no version or evidence from the side of the opposite party.                   
4. The evidence in this case consists of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A5 marked on the side of the complainant.  There is no oral or documentary evidence from the side of the opposite party.
5. Issues to be considered:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice

               on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the complainant is entitle to the relief claimed in the
3. Order as to cost?

6. Heard. Perused records, affidavit and documents.  In order to establish the case of the complainant, the complainant sworn an affidavit as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A5 were produced and marked.  Ext.A1 is the copy of the bill dated 25/06/2020.  Ext.A2 is the copy of the money receipt details dated 31/08/2020.  Ext.A3 is the copy of the legal notice dated 22/09/2020.  Ext.A4 is the copy of the postal receipt.  Ext.A5 is the copy of track consignment.  There is no evidence from the side of the opposite party to discredit the evidence adduced by the complainant.  Hence the evidence adduced by the complainant stands unchallenged.  In the absence of any contra evidence from the side of the opposite party, we accepted the evidence adduced by the complainant.  By swearing an affidavit as PW1 and by marking Ext.A1 to A5, we find that the complainant has succeeded in establishing his case against the opposite party.  From the available evidence before this Commission, we find that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.  As the mental agony and financial loss to the complainant was caused due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party, we find that the opposite party is liable to compensate the losses sustained by the complainant.  In view of the above discussions, we find that this is a fit case to be allowed in favour of the complainant.

In the result the complaint is allowed.The opposite party is directed to refund Rs.43,640/- (Rupees Forty Three Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Only) along with Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred Only) towards cost of this proceedings to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount except cost shall carry interest @9% from the date of order till the date of realization/remittance.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 21^st day of February,  2023.

C.C. No. 218/2020

APPENDIX

1. COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

2. COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

3. OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

4. OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

                                                                                                                            Sd/-

                                                                                                                                   PRESIDENT