The Professional Couriers, H.No.9-4-15, 1st Floor, Station Road, Khammam.
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM AT KHAMMAM Dated this, the 6th day of October, 2010. CORAM:1. Sri.Vijay Kumar, B.Com.L.L.B., President, 2. Sri.K.V. Kaladhar, B.Sc., B.L., Member 3. Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha, B.Sc. B.L., Member C.C. No.70/2009 Between: Nerella Srinivasa Rao, S/o Balakrishna, Age:42yrs, Occu:Advocate, R/o Khammam. Complainant And The Professional Couriers, 9-4-15, I Floor, Station Road, Khammam. Opposite party. This C.C. came before us for hearing in the presence of Sri.Ch.Srinivasacharyulu, Advocate for complainant and of Sri K. Jagan Mohan Rao, Advocate for opposite party; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing arguments, and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:- ORDER (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 is an advocate and sent a notice to S.R. Cherukuri, Hyderabad on 30-08-2008 through the courier service of opposite party, for which the opposite party had issued a receipt vide consignment note No. KMM 0935373, but the complainant did not receive either unserved cover or acknowledgement from the opposite party and as such the complainant approached the opposite party many a times but there is no response from the opposite party and failed to clarify whether the consignment was delivered to the consignee or not. The complainant further submitted that he sent the certified copies of important documents to the consignee to prefer an appeal within limitation, due to non-receipt of consignment within time, suffered a lot. Therefore, issued legal notice on 27-05-2009, and in spite of receiving the notice, the opposite party neither responded nor given any reply and as such the complainant knocked the doors of Consumer Forum by praying to direct the opposite party to pay Rs.10,000/- towards damages 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:- Courier receipt, dated 30-08-2008. Ex.A2:- Office copy of legal notice dated 27-05-2009, with Acknowledgement 3. On receipt of notice, the opposite party appeared through its counsel and filed counter by denying the averments made in the complaint. 4. In the counter, the opposite party admitted that the complainant sent a consignment consisting notice through its courier service on 30-08-2008 with consignment note No.KMM 0935373 and thereafter, the same was delivered to the consignee with phone number 9885443334 and as such there is no deficiency of service and prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs. 5. In support of his averments, the complainant filed written arguments by reiterating the same facts as mentioned in the complaint. 6. 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? It is the case of the complainant that he booked a consignment, consisting of certified copies of some documents through the opposite partys courier service to S.R. Cherukuri, Hyderabad on 30-08-2008, the opposite party issued a receipt vide consignment note No. KMM 0935373 to that effect. But, even after completion of months together, he did not receive acknowledgement or un-served cover. Therefore, he approached the opposite party regarding the information of delivery of consignment. However, there is no response from the opposite party till the date of complaint, whether it was timely delivered to the consignee or not and as such the complainant seeks redressal from the opposite party. On the other hand, it is the case of the opposite party that after booking of consignment, it was delivered to the consignee with phone number of 9885443334. As such there is no deficiency on the part of them and the complaint is not maintainable and prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs. In view of the above submissions, put forth by both the parties, we are of the opinion that it is the duty of the opposite party to disprove the averments of the complaint by filing necessary documents from their side, in the instant case, the opposite party failed to file any documents regarding the proof of delivery of consignment even after furnishing of necessary information regarding the consignment Number along with date of booking of consignment and they also failed to file any material in support of its averments except filing of written statement and moreover, it failed to locate the address of the consignee for the purpose of filing proof of delivery sheet (Run Sheet) even though, he had knowledge about the mobile number of consignee, it seems that the attitude of opposite party, definitely amounts to deficiency of service, therefore the point is answered accordingly against the opposite party by holding that it is liable to bear some compensation for causing inconvenience and loss of certified copies of documents. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part, directing the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.500/- towards damages and Rs.500/- towards costs of the litigation. Typed to my dictation, corrected by me and pronounced by us, in this Forum on this 6th day of October, 2010. President Member Member District Consumers Forum, Khammam Appendix of evidence Witnesses examined for complainant and opposite parties: -None- Exhibits marked for complainant:- Ex.A1:- Courier receipt, dated 30-08-2008. Ex.A2:- Office copy of legal notice dated 27-05-2009, with Acknowledgement Exhibits marked for opposite party:- - Nil - President Member Member District Consumers Forum, Khammam
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
