R.Sukumarn, filed a consumer case on 10 May 2016 against The Managing Director,CNI Logistics Pvt Ltd, in the North Chennai Consumer Court. The case no is 182/2012 and the judgment uploaded on 01 Jun 2016.
Complaint presented on: 16.08.2012
Order pronounced on: 10.05.2016
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)
2nd 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
TUESDAY THE 10th DAY OF MAY 2016
C.C.NO.182/2012
R.Sukumaran,
Son of late Mr. D.Ramamurthi,
New No.33, Old No.9, Warren Road,
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.
..... Complainant
..Vs..
1.The Managing Director, CNI LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED, (Packers and Movers) “JPR Palace” 25/1, 100 Feet Road, Kolathur, Chennai – 600 099.
2. The Branch Manager, CNI LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED S.No. 174/5, Mukkam Post, Thathawade, Tal. Mulshi, Pune – 411 033. |
| |
...Opposite Parties |
|
Date of complaint 21.08.2012
Counsel for Complainant : M/s. Dr.P. Vasudevan
Counsel for opposite party : M/s. Devadason & Sagar
O R D E R
BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.SC., B.L.,
This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.
1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:
The Complainant handed over 150 house hold articles and one Maruti Alto Car to the 2nd Opposite Party for transportation from Pune to Chennai. The total freight charges for the said article was Rs.43,000/- for a full load. A sum of Rs.35,000/- was paid at Pune and the balance amount was paid on 06.02.2013. The domestic articles 136 was delivered to the Complainant as against 150 was booked on 07.06.2012. The car was delivered on 29.02.2012. Out of the delivered articles three articles do not belong to the Complainant and hence 17 articles yet to be delivered by the Opposite Party. They are plastic commando chairs, wooden chair, bed containing two woolen blankets with six pillows and 14 numbers card boxes containing domestic materials and personal belongings. Out of the delivered articles wooden almirah, DVD Disk cup boards, plastic tub and buckets and food items, provisions very badly damaged. The Complainant estimated the damage and cost of the materials not delivered is estimated at Rs.95,000/- The damage to the articles and non delivery of articles and inordinate delay in delivering the articles proves that the Opposite Parties committed Deficiency in Service. Therefore the Complainant filed this Complaint to direct the Opposite Party to deliver the undelivered articles and compensation for mental agony with cost of the Complaint.
2.WRITTEN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES IN BRIEF:
It is admitted that the Complainant approached the Opposite Parties for transport of the house hold articles and as per the terms and conditions found in the consignment note, the Opposite Parties also transported the articles and delivered to the Complainant. The Complainant also paid transportation charges for Rs.43,000/- viz. Rs.33,000/- on 24.01.2012 and the balance was paid on 06.02.2012. The Opposite Parties delivered the articles under the supervision of Mr.Boopathy along with his workers. After they arranged the articles in the house as per the direction of the Complainant, the said Boopathy requested the Complainant for acknowledgement of the articles and for which he scolded the workers and asked them to get out of the compound and accordingly they left on 09.02.2012. The Opposite Parties sent a letter to the Complainant requesting for the acknowledgement and however he did not reply. Thus the non deliveries of 17 items of articles are imaginary. Hence the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service and therefore they are not liable to pay any damages to the Complainant and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3.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 relief?
4. POINT:1
The admitted facts are that the Complainant booked 150 articles under Ex.A1 lorry receipt and an Alto Car under Ex.A2 lorry receipt at Pune and the same was transported to Chennai for delivery to the Complainant and the Complainant paid towards the freight charges of Rs.35,000/- under Ex.A3 by way of cash and the balance was paid on 06.02.2012.
5. According to the Complainant out of the 150 articles only 136 was delivered to him on 07.02.2012 and out of which 3 articles do not belong to him and the Opposite Parties yet to deliver 17 house hold articles and in some of the delivered articles were in damaged conditions and the car was delivered on 29.02.2012 and the Complainant estimated the damage of the articles and the value of the articles yet to be delivered around Rs.95,000/- and even after issuing Ex.A5 legal notice the Opposite Parties have not delivered the article and hence this Complaint is filed against them.
6. The Opposite Party would contend that in the agreement there is a clause for Arbitration and the Complainant approached the Forum without invoking the same establishes this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the Complaint and further after delivery of the articles one Mr.Boopathy asked for the acknowledgement of the articles and for which the Complainant refused to sign for the same and driven away the workers of the Opposite Parties and the said Boopathy also gave Ex.B1 report to the 1st Opposite Party and then the 1st Opposite Party sent Ex.B2 letter stating the incident narrated in Ex.B1 to the Complainant and however for the said letter there was no reply from the Complainant and hence the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service.
7. Admittedly the house hold article was delivered to the Complainant on 07.02.2012. The Complainant says that 17 articles of him were not delivered on that day. If such number of articles was not actually delivered, he could have immediately wrote a letter to the 1st Opposite Party who is at Chennai. However Supervisor Mr.Boopathy who delivered the articles along with other workers for Opposite Parties gave Ex.B1 letter to the 1st Opposite Party that they were scolded and sent out of the house. Based on that letter, the 1st Opposite Party written Ex.B2 letter on 09.02.2012 to the Complainant narrating the incident at the time of delivery. Only after 40 days the Complainant sent legal notice to the Opposite Parties. The Complainant did not state anything about Ex.B2 legal notice in his Complaint. The Opposite Parties specifically stated in their written version filed on 04.02.2013 about the incident narrated in Ex.B1 & Ex. B2. Such a fact was not denied by the Complainant in his proof affidavit which was filed on 11.06.2013 after 4 months of the filing of the written version. When the facts stated in the written version has not been denied by the Complainant in his subsequent proof affidavit only proves that the allegation made in the written version in respect of the incident took place at the time of delivery in the Complainant house is true. Though the Complainant alleged that there are damages in some of the delivered articles, there is no proof filed by the Complainant to accept the damage in the articles. The Opposite Parties contended that the entire articles were delivered. In view of the forgoing circumstances that we hold that the entire articles booked by the Complainant at Pune have been delivered to the Complainant at Chennai and therefore we hold that the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service.
8. POINT:2
Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief in the Complaint and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.
In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 10th day of May 2016.
MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 dated 24.01.2012 Lorry Receipt bearing No.529 issued by the 1st
Opposite Party
Ex.A2 dated 24.01.2012 Lorry Receipt bearing No.530 issued by the 1st
Opposite Party
Ex.A3 dated 24.01.2012 Cash Receipt issued by the 1st Opposite Party
Ex.A4 dated 06.02.2012 ATM withdrawal/ Transfer Slip
Ex.A5 dated 20.03.2012 Lawyer’s Notice sent to the Opposite Parties with
postal acknowledgement card
Ex.A6 dated NIL Returned cover of Lawyer’s Notice (sent to pune
office of Opposite Parties)
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:
Ex.B1 dated 07.02.2012 Letter from Boopathy to the 1st Opposite Party
Ex.B2 dated 09.02.2012 Letter from Opposite Party to Complainant
Ex.B3 dated 09.02.2012 Currier Receipt
.
MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.