This C.C. is coming before us for final hearing, in the presence of Sri. K.Satyanarayana, Advocate for Complainant and of Sri.K.Prabhakar Rao, Advocate for opposite parties No.1 & 2; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-
O R D E R
(Per Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha, Member)
1. This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant sent a consignment, consisting of cloths worth of Rs.30,000/-, to his daughter, who is residing at Chikago of U.S.A., together with her family. The complainant had booked the said consignment, on the occasion of birthday of his grand daughter, through the opposite party by registered parcel on 20-07-2009 by mentioning the address as “Sunkara Ashok Kumar, 3732, MIST Flowvr LN, Naperville, Illininois, Chikago, U.S.A. with cell phone number 0016308028230”. The opposite party had issued a computer receipt bearing No.fgn- AIR-RP C 207 to that effect, but it was not delivered to the consignee nor returned to the complainant till 12-09-2009. Therefore the complainant submitted an application to the opposite party No.1 on 12-09-2009 regarding the non-receipt of consignment and requested for pursuance. On 25-09-2009 the complainant received a reply from the opposite party No.2 by stating that they enquiring into the matter and inform shortly about the delivery of consignment and again on 10-11-2009 the opposite party No.2 had addressed another letter in continuation of letter dated 25-09-2009, by informing that the article was correctly dispatched to New York on 24-07-2009 through Chennai International and reached the same to U.S.A. on 26-08-2009, but there is no information from the opposite parties regarding the final disposal till the date of complaint. Due to which, the complainant again addressed a letter dated 19-02-2009 to the opposite party No.2 by registered post through the nearby post office of the complainant’s village but even after passing of 40days, the complainant neither received the acknowledgment nor un-served cover and vexed with the attitude of opposite parties, the complainant and his daughter suffered a lot and as such the complainant filed the present complaint by praying to direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.30,000/- towards loss of cloths and Rs.20,000/- towards damages for causing mental agony and costs.
2. Along with the complaint, the complainant filed his affidavit and also filed the following documents, which were marked as Exhibits.
Ex.A1:- Original Computer receipt, dated 20-07-2009, issued by
opposite parties.
Ex.A2:- Carbon Copy of letter dated 12-09-2008, addressed by the
complainant to the opposite party No.1.
Ex.A3:- Letter dated 25-09-2009 addressed by the opposite party No.2
Ex.A4:- Letter dated 10-11-2009 addressed by the opposite party No.2
Ex.A5:- Letter dated 19-02-2010 addressed by the complainant with
Postal receipt
3. On receipt of notice, the opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed the counter by denying the averments made in the complaint.
4. In the counter, the opposite parties admitted the booking of consignment through their parcel service vide consignment No. Fgn AIR-RP 207 dated 27-07-2009 to the consignee of Chikago and also submitted that after receiving of complaint regarding the non-delivery of consignment, they lodged a complaint in web site on 24-09-2009 and intimated the same to the complainant through a letter dated 25-09-2008. The opposite parties further submitted that the article was delivered to the country of destination through Chennai International, therefore they made enquiries with the customer care center of Chennai International for tracing out the disposal of article and on enquiries, the customer care center given a reply on 19-10-2009 by mentioning that the parcel was dispatched to New York on 24-07-2009, again the opposite parties requested the customer care center through a letter dated 26-10-2009 regarding the furnishing date of delivery and for which, the customer care center given a reply in web site on 28-10-2009 by stating that the above mentioned article was reached to U.S.A. on 26-08-2009 and also stated that the enquiry is under process with the U.S. Postal authorities. For International delivery of articles require long time to trace out and the said problem was informed to the complainant on 20-07-2009. The opposite parties further submitted that the department has passed the article as per the rules without any negligence or delay. The Indian Postal Department is not responsible for the manner in which, article either delivered or returned as per the regulations of country of destination and as per the rules governed by the International Regulations. As such there is no negligence or deficiency on the part of them and the matter is still under process and the reply is to be received from the country of destination, if the article was sent to foreign country, so many checks and security measures is to be involved and there is no willful negligence or default and fraudulent behaviour on their part in delivery of consignment and acted as per the rules and regulations of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 and the department is exempted from the liability under section 6 of said Act. As such prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.
5. Along with the counter, the opposite parties filed the same documents as filed by the complainant, apart from those documents they have filed contents of section 6 of IPO Act, 1898, Column No.14 of post office guide part II 1986 and details of communication in web site between opposite parties and Chennai International, which were marked as Exhibits B1 to B3 respectively.
6. In support of their averments, the opposite parties filed written arguments by reiterating the same facts as mentioned in the counter.
7. In view of the above submissions, now the point that arose for consideration is, whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?
As per the averments of both the parties, it is an undisputed fact that the complainant had booked a foreign consignment at the office of opposite party No.1 on 20-07-2009 for delivery of cloths, worth of Rs.30,000/- to his daughter’s family, who are residing at Chikago of U.S.A., but it could not reach the destination even after lapse of nearly about two months, as such the complainant approached the opposite party No.1 and submitted a written application regarding the non-receipt of parcel either to the destination or to the sender and even after making number of oral & written correspondence, there is no specific information from the opposite parties regarding the delivery of consignment and in support of his averments, the complainant placed Ex.A1 to A5. Ex.A1 is the computerized receipt, which shows that the consignment was booked on 20-07-2009 with a weight of 1648gms. to one Sunkara Ashok, Chikago of U.S.A., for that, the opposite parties collected Rs.935/- towards charges for consignment. Ex.A2 is the letter addressed by the complainant to the HPO, Khammam. According to the contents of Ex.A2, the registered parcel (consignment) consisting of new cloths worth of Rs.30,000/-, sent to his daughter, who is at U.S.A. In response to Ex.A2, the opposite parties intimated the complainant through Ex.A3, by stating that they are enquiring into the matter and again on 10-11-2009, the opposite party No.2 addressed a letter to the complainant by informing that the article was correctly dispatched to New York on 24-07-2009 by Chennai International and it was reached to U.S.A., on 26-08-2008 i.e. after one month from the date of dispatch to New York and also informed with regard to the final disposal, that it will be received from the concerned foreign authorities in about two months. Inspite of waiting for two months, the complainant did not receive any information with regard to either disposal or return of parcel. Therefore, he again addressed a letter dated 19-02-2010, which is evidenced under Ex.A5 by submitting that the parcel was not reached to its destination nor returned to him till the date of Ex.A5 and as such he was compelled to file the complaint before this Forum. On the other hand, the opposite parties filed written arguments on 05-10-2010 i.e. on the date of present matter was posted for orders by submitting that the enquiry is still under process and awaiting for reply from country of destination and course of action is still going on. In view of the averments put forth by both the parties and basing on the material, it is clear that the opposite parties failed to deliver the consignment even after lapse of one year from the date of consignment and also failed to furnish necessary information to that effect and moreover they could not file any proof with regard to what steps they have taken for disposal of consignment within a reasonable time with the Postal authorities of U.S.A., it is clear that they failed to pursue the matter with the proper authorities till the date of filing of written arguments and in spite of taking nearly about 11months time, they failed to grab any further information of disposal from the authorities concerned after letter dated 10.11.2009 it clearly shows that the opposite parties did not provide proper services to its consumer in spite of having sufficient time from the date of consignment as such it amounts to deficiency of service on their part. Therefore, they are liable to bear loss of the complainant by paying cost of cloths as they did not deny about the value of cloths, even after filing of Ex.A2, which shows cost of cloths at Rs.30,000/- and as such the point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant.
8. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part, directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of cloths and Rs.1000/- towards damages and Rs.1000/- towards costs.
Typed to my dictation, Corrected and pronounced by us, in this Forum on this 20th day of October, 2010.
President Member Member
District Consumers Forum, Khammam
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined for complainant: None
Witnesses examined for opposite parties: None
Exhibits marked for Complainant:
Ex.A1:- Original Computer receipt, dated 20-07-2009, issued by
opposite parties.
Ex.A2:- Carbon Copy of letter dated 12-09-2008, addressed by the
complainant to the opposite party No.1.
Ex.A3:- Letter dated 25-09-2009 addressed by the opposite party No.2
Ex.A4:- Letter dated 10-11-2009 addressed by the opposite party No.2
Ex.A5:- Letter dated 19-02-2010 addressed by the complainant with
Postal receipt
Exhibits marked for opposite parties:
Ex.B.1 - Contents of section 6 of IPO Act, 1898,
Ex.B.2 - Column No.14 of post office guide part II 1986
Ex.B.3 - Details of communication in web site between opposite parties
and Chennai International.
President Member Member
District Consumers Forum, Khammam
