Final Order / Judgement | IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MADIKERI PRESENT:1. SRI. C.V. MARGOOR, B.Com.LLM,PRESIDENT 2. SRI.M.C.DEVAKUMAR,B.E.LLB.PG.DCLP,MEMBER | CC No.10/2018 ORDER DATED 01ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018 | | Sri. Sujith.J, S/o. Jayakumar V.B. Aged 27 years, Housing Board, Kushalnagar, Somwarpet Taluk, Kodagu District. (IN PERSON) | -Complainant | V/s | Professional Couriers, Kushalnagar 571 234, Somwarept Taluk, Kodagu District. (By Sri. K.A. Keerthi Rajkumar, Advocate) | -Opponent | Nature of complaint | Courier service | Date of filing of complaint | 01/03/2018 | Date of Issue notice | 07/04/2018 | Date of order | 18/08/2018 | Duration of proceeding | 5 months 31 days |
SRI. C.V. MARGOOR,PRESIDENT O R D E R - This complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by Mr. Sujith.J s/o. Jayakumar.V.B resident of Kushalnagar, Somwarpet Taluk, Kodagu District with a prayer to direct the opponent to trace the parcel and return the same to him or otherwise the opponent shall pay the value of the material a sum of Rs.1,000/- plus Rs.10,000/-. Further prayed to award compensation of rs.10,000/- towards the shock and mental agony for not reaching the parcel to the addressee.
- The opponent is the Professional Couriers running business at Kushalnagar. The complainant has sent material for installation for BSNL site to one Mahesh Hegade resident of Bijapur through the opponent. The said material did not deliver to the addressee Mahesh Hegde by the opponent Branch Office at Bijapur. On account of this the complainant said to have loss of Rs.10,000/- as he has purchased the same product locally and completed the installation. The complainant has requested the opponent for non- delivery of the parcel and there after lodged complaint before the opponent on 17/01/2018. Inspite of the complaint no response has been received by the complainant hence, this complaint.
- The opponent after service of notice appeared through its learned counsel and resisted the averments of complaint. It is the contention of opponent that if the goods is insured, if any mishap regarding the delay in reaching the parcel due to unavoidable transit or misplace the opponent will reimburse the declared insured amount. In this case the opponent is ready to pay the insured amount as declared by the complainant since it is found that the parcel material has not reached the addressee. The complainant is not entitled for compensation as sought in the complaint. On the above grounds, the opponent prays to dismiss the complaint.
- The complainant filed his affidavit evidence and got marked exhibits P1 and P2 documents. On behalf of opponent one Shakeer.K s/o.late C.M. Abdulla Kutti, Manager, Professional Courier, Kushalnagar filed his affidavit evidence.
- We heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the opponent and the complainant in person and the points that would arise for determination are as under;
- Whether the complainant proves that the act of opponent not delivering the parcel to the addressee amounts to deficiency in service?
- To what order?
- Our findings on the above points is as under;
- Point No.1:- In the Affirmative
- Point No.2:- As per final order for the below
R E A S O N S - Point No.1 and 2 :- The complainant submitted that for not delivering the parcel sent through the opponent to the addressee he shall have to purchase same product locally and installed it by investing huge amount. As against this the learned counsel for the opponent argued that the complainant has endorsed on the receipt the product value is Rs.1,000/-. In this case the complainant produced exhibit P1 receipt issued by opponent dated 22/11/2017 for sending consignment i.e. BSNL material worth Rs.1,000/-. The said material has sent to Mahesh Hegade resident of Bijapur. The weight of the product is 1kg 580 grams. The opponent has collected charges of Rs.180/- from the complainant to send the parcel to Bijapur. The opponent has not disputed the fact that the said parcel has not reached the addressee Mahesh Hegade. Exhibit P2 is complaint lodged to the opponent on 17/01/2018 for not delivering the parcel to the addressee at Bijapur. The opponent in the version and affidavit has not disputed not delivering the parcel sent by the complainant to the addressee at Bijapur and also exhibit P2 complaint lodged on 17/01/2018 to that effect.
- The learned counsel for the opponent argued that the opponent is ready to pay the value of the material a sum of Rs.1,000/-. The value of BSNL material mentioned in exhibit P1 receipt dated 22/11/2017 is Rs.1,000/-. The opponent has collected Rs.180/- as charges to send the parcel through its courier. The complainant in the complaint and affidavit evidence stated that when the material did not reach the addressee again he has to purchase the same type of product locally and installed it. Due to negligence on the part of opponent courier service the complainant has to invest the amount twice i.e. double for purchase of BSNL material. It shows that initially the complainant has paid Rs.1,000/- for purchase of material and again he has to pay more than the said amount for the local product at Bijapur. That apart the complainant has paid Rs.180/- charges to send courier parcel. When the complainant has approached for not reaching the parcel to the addressee the opponent would have paid the value of material before lodging complaint on 17/01/2018. Even after lodging complaint before the opponent on 17/01/2018 marked at exhibit P2 the opponent had an opportunity to pay the price of the material and double investment amount. The opponent did not respond even after filing exhibit P2 complaint on 17/01/2018 before it there after the complainant was compelled to approach this Forum on 01/03/2018. It shows that the complainant has suffered mental shock for not delivering the parcel on time and suffered mental agony to approach the opponent to lodge complaint frequently. The opponent shall liable to pay the product value of Rs.3,000/- since he has invested twice and that apart he has paid charges of Rs.180/-. The opponent shall liable to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards the mental shock and agony to the complainant. In all the opponent shall liable to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- to the complainant plus Rs.1,000/- litigation cost. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following;
O R D E R - The complaint filed by Mr.Sujith J s/o. Jayakumar.V.B is partly allowed directing the opponent to pay a sum of Rs.9,000/- towards the cost of parcel, compensation and litigation expenses within two months from the date of order. In case fails to pay within two months, then it carries interest at the rate of 10% per annum from 01/12/2017 till its realization.
- Furnish copy of order to the complainant and opposite party at free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and got it transcribed and corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this 01st day of SEPTEMBER, 2018) (C.V. MARGOOR) PRESIDENT (M.C. DEVAKUMAR) MEMBER | |