Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/76/2013

Bhuvaneswari Pharmach Pvt Ltd - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Professional Couriers - Opp.Party(s)

S. Natarajan

01 Nov 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 25.02.2013

                                                                          Date of Order : 01.11.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.76/2013

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 01^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018

                                 

Bhuvaneswari Pharmach Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its Assistant Marketing Manager,

No.22, Thirueermalai Road,

Chennai – 600 044.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                       

 

   ..Versus..

 

The Professional Couriers,

Rep. by its Manager,

No.32, Thiru Vi Ka Road,

Royapettah,

Chennai – 600 014.                                                   ..  Opposite party.

          

Counsel for complainant       :  M/s. S. Natarajan

Counsel for opposite party   :  M/s. S. Sathyanarayanan

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.71,435/- being the value of consignment with interest at the rate of 24% from 15.03.2012 to till the date of realization and to pay a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony with cost of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant.

 

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he booked a consignment of 16 numbers of Seal Kit for Hydraulic Cylinder valuing Rs.71,435/- to their customer M/s. Perfeti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd. with the opposite party on 15.03.2012.  the complainant paid a sum of Rs.205/- towards charges as per booking slip No.MAA 504334528 dated:15.03.2012 issued by the opposite party.   Further the complainant submits that while booking itself had insisted the opposite party to insure the valuable consignment, which was not done.   Further the complainant submits that the consignment was not reached the destination and delivered to the consignee.   Evenafter repeated contacts with the opposite party and its Head Office through e-mails on 30.03.2012, 10.04.2012 and 18.04.2012, they replied that they are searching the consignment. But at long last, the opposite party sent a reply dated:20.04.2012, they declared that the consignment was found missing.  Hence, the complainant issued legal notice dated:20.08.2012 which was received by the opposite party but not acted upon.   The act of the opposite party caused great mental agony.  Hence the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite party is as follows:

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.    The opposite party states that the consignment vide No.MAA504334528 was booked on 15.03.2012 without declaring the contents, its value and also without any instructions to get it insured to one M/s. Perfeti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Rundrapur.   But unfortunately due to the circumstances beyond the control of the opposite party, the said consignment was lost in transit and not reached Rudrapur.  Since the complainant is a regular customer of the opposite party who is well aware of the functions and operations of the courier service and using the service of this opposite party for long years, the consignment was registered.   Further the opposite party states that according to the clause 10 of the above said contracts, the complainant is bound to make its own arrangements to insure the consignment if the value of the same exceeds Rs.5,000/-.  Further the opposite party states that the consignment was duly transported but it was lost on shipment.  For that, the opposite party shall not held liable since the complainant failed and neglected to insure the consignment.   Further the opposite party states that the claim of compensation of Rs.7,86,435/- is arbitrary and imaginary.    Therefore, there is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.    To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite party is filed and document Ex.B1 is marked on the side of the opposite party.

 

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.71,435/- towards the value of the consignment with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant entitled to a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony with cost of Rs.15,000/- as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

The opposite party alone filed his written arguments.  The complainant has not preferred to file either written arguments or advance oral arguments.   Heard the opposite party’s Counsel also.   Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  Admittedly, the complainant booked a consignment of 16 numbers of Seal Kit for Hydraulic Cylinder valuing Rs.71,435/- on 15.03.2012 as per Ex.A1 is admitted.   Ex.A2 is the courier receipt.  Further the complainant pleaded and contended that while booking the consignment, requested the opposite party to insure the consignment for avoiding deficiency in delivery.  But the opposite party assured the complainant that no need of such insurance for simple consignment of the Seal Kit. Further the contention of the complainant is that the consignment was not reached the destination and delivered to the consignee.   Evenafter repeated contacts with the opposite party and its Head Office through e-mail, they replied that they are searching the consignment.  But at long last as per Ex.A6, the opposite party declared that the consignment found missing.  Hence the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice dated:20.08.2012 as per Ex.A7 for such deficiency and negligence in service.   The complaint is claiming a sum of Rs.71,435/- being the value of consignment with a compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- for deficiency in service and mental agony.

6.     The learned Counsel for the opposite party contended that admittedly, the consignment was booked as per Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 on 15.03.2012.   Since the complainant is a regular customer of the opposite party who is well aware of the functions and operations of the courier service and using the service of this opposite party for long years, the consignment was registered as per Ex.B1.  As per the contract between the consignor and the consignee any goods valuing Rs.5,000/- more shall be insured.   In this case, the complainant has not disclosed the value of the goods and has not insured the consignment.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A1, it is very clear that the value of the consignment is Rs.71,435/-.   Under such circumstances, the opposite party shall not register the consignment without insurance of violating their own terms and conditions.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that the consignment was duly transported but it was lost on shipment.  For that, the opposite party shall not be held liable since the complainant failed and neglected to insure the consignment.  But it is very clear from the records that the opposite party failed in his duty after making suitable rules for such insurance and registered the consignment valuing Rs.71,435/- without insurance.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that the claim of compensation of Rs.7,86,435/- is arbitrary and imaginary.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.71,435/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of complaint with a compensation of Rs.20,000/- and cost of Rs.10,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.71,435/- (Rupees Seventy one thousand four hundred and thirty five only) being the value of the consignment with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of complaint (i.e.) 25.02.2013 to till the date of this order and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) to the complainant.

The above  amounts shall be payable  within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 01^st day of November 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	15.03.2012	Copy of invoice
Ex.A2	15.03.2012	Copy of courier receipt
Ex.A3	30.03.2012	Copy of the complainant’s email
Ex.A4	10.04.2012	Copy of the complainant’s email
Ex.A5	18.04.2012	Copy of the complainant’s email
Ex.A6	20.04.2012	Copy of opposite party’s reply
Ex.A7	20.08.2012	Copy of the complainant’s notice
Ex.A8		Copy of postal acknowledgement due

 

OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS: 

Ex.B1

14.04.2015

Copy of Contract Document for Courier Services

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT