Karnataka

Kolar

CC/52/2018

Sri.M.Nagaraj - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor,Yashikla Silks - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.R.C.Appaji Gowda & Sri.R.V.Narayana Kumar

28 Jul 2018

ORDER

Date of Filing: 12/06/2018

Date of Order: 28/07/2018

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 28^th DAY OF JULY 2018

PRESENT

SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, B.Sc., LLB., PRESIDENT

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL, LLB.,  ……  LADY MEMBER

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 52 OF 2018

Sri. M. Nagaraj,

S/o. late A.Muniswamappa,

Aged About 56 Years,

Shop by name Balaji Silks,

No.1128, Patalamma Extension,

Near Gandhi Circle, Malur Town,

Malur Taluk, Kolar District.                                         ….  COMPLAINANT.

(Rep. by Sri.R.C.Appaji Gowda & Sri.R.V.Narayana Kumar, Advocates)

 

- V/s -

1) The Proprietor,

Yashika Silks,No.54,

Nethaji Road, Thavittupalayam,

Anthiyur, Erode, District,

Tamil Nadu-638501.

(Ex-parte)

 

2) The Manager,

Kings Speed Parcel Services,

HO: 27-D, Street No.3,

Thoppakulam, Near Flower Market,

Coimbatore-01.

(Ex-parte)

 

3) The Manager,

Kings Speed Parcel Services,

Gobichettypalayam,

Near Girls Higher Secondary School,

Sathyamagalaam-638 402,

Erode District, Tamil Nadu.

(Ex-parte)

 

4) The Manager,

Kings Speed Parcel Services,

No.254, 3^rd Main Chamarajpet,

Opp: Sub Registrar Office,

Shivaganga Mutt Road,

Bangalore-560 018.

(Ex-parte)                                                                        …. OPPOSITE PARTIES.

-: ORDER:-

BY SMT. A.C. LALITHA, LADY MEMBER,

01.   The complainant having submitted this complaint as envisaged Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter in short it is referred as “the Act”) has sought relief of issuance of directions to OP Nos. 2 to 4 jointly and severally to make payment of Rs.2,80,528/- in respect of raw-silk as per Invoice vide No.296 or alternative relief OP No.2 to 4 shall deliver fresh raw-silk to him with same quality, quantity with present cost and also sought compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- with 18% interest per annum from the date of filing of this complaint for the damages, mental agony, harassment and also sought costs and any other reliefs as this Forum deems to be fit.

 

02.   The facts in brief:-

(a)    It is contention of the complainant that, as an self-employment for his livelihood he is running a shop by name “Balaji Silks” at the address as given in the cause-title.  On 04.12.2017 he had sent a raw silk measuring 62,730 kgs, costs at about Rs.2,80,528/- as per Invoice No.296 to OP No.1 through OP No.4 as per the receipt No. GCN No.0200281, dated: 04.12.2017.

 

(b)    He further contends that, he came to know that, the goods are not delivered to OP No.1 so he approached OP No.4 and verified.  OP No.4 instructed him to verify with OP No.3.  Accordingly he approached OP No.3 in the month of February 1^st week of 2018.  After verification OP No.3 told him that, by mistake goods were delivered wrongly to Naheem instead of OP No.1 and assured him to rectify the same.

 

(c)    Further it is contended that, he complained the same to Weavers Association Anthiyur.  And he had also approached OP No.2 being an Head Office at Coimbatore, after verification of documents it admits the mistake done by OP No.3 and assured to rectify the same.  He did not get any solution even after waiting for some time.  So he issued a letter on 12.03.2018 to Ops and he had issued a legal notice dated: 27.04.2018 through his learned counsel to OP Nos.2 to 4.  By not rectifying the mistake done by OP No.4, OP Nos.2 to 4 have rendered deficiency in service and OP No.1 is made only a formal party to this case.  So contending, the complainant has come up with this complaint by seeking above set-out reliefs.

 

03.   As per the proceedings noted in the order-sheet since served with notice Ops remained absent and hence placed ex-parte.

 

04.   The complainant has submitted his affidavit evidence by way of examination-in-chief and submitted below mentioned documents:-

(i) Original Tax Invoice certificate

(ii) Original copy of Kings Speed parcel service

(iii) Notice of Balaji Silks service

(iv) Legal Notice copy

(v) Postal receipt

(vi) Postal acknowledgements & return RPAD cover

(vii) Copy of Petrol Bunk Bill

 

05.   Heard arguments of learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

 

06.   Therefore the points that do arise for our consideration are:-

(1) Whether this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as per the office objection noted in the order-sheet dated: 18.06.2018?

 

(2) If so, whether the Ops are guilty of deficiency in service?

 

(3) If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as he sought?

 

(4) What order?

07.   Our findings on the above stated points are:-

POINT (1):-      In the Affirmative

POINT (2):-      In the Affirmative as against OP No.4

                        & Negative as against OP Nos.1 to 3.

POINT (3):-      In the Affirmative as against OP No.4

 

POINT (4):-      As per the final order

for the following:-

REASONS

POINT (1):-

08.   On perusal of order-sheet dated: 18.06.2018 there is an office objection with regard to jurisdiction of this Forum to entertain this complaint.  The receipt dated: 04.12.2017 vide GCN No. 0200281 submitted by the complainant which was issued by Kings Speed Parcel Service, Bangalore, i.e., OP No.4 indicates that, this complainant has booked goods with OP No.4 to send it to some other place.  That means the contract existed between them, thus the complainant had become Consumer to OP No.4 accordingly and when dispute araised between them definitely it will be a Consumer Dispute.  Therefore in our view this complaint comes under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and thus this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.

 

POINTS (2) & (3):-

09.   To avoid repetition in reasonings and as these points do warrant common course of discussion, the same are taken up for consideration at a time.

 

(a)    Before entering in to discussion on merits of the case, we deem it essential to state at this juncture, the Ops remained uncontested and the averments of complainant together with said documents and affidavit of complainant since remained un-opposed so we have no hesitation to hold that, this complaint stood proved.

 

(b)    In fact the complainant has pleaded as OP No.1 is only a formal party to this proceedings, so we too consider OP No.1 is only a formal party and no need to discuss much as against OP No.1.

 

(c)    On perusal of Tax Invoice dated: 04.12.2017 it reveals that, Yashika Silks i.e., OP No.1 had purchased 62,730 kgs of raw silk from Balaji Silks i.e., complainant which worth to a total sum of Rs.2,80,528/-.  And the same material was booked with Kings Speed Parcel Service i.e., OP No.4 to send it to OP No.1 place as per receipt dated: 04.12.2017 vide GCN No.0200281.  By not sending the said goods to agreed destination OP No.4 has rendered deficiency in service and also Ops have not replied to the notice of this complainant and the same repeated for the notice issued by this Forum also.  This act of Ops amounts to deficiency in their service.  Since the contract exists between OP No.4 and complainant we hold OP No.4 is held responsible for the said incident and hence we hold other Ops as formal parties to the proceedings of this case. 

 

(d)    In view of the above discussions we hold that, OP No.4 has rendered deficiency in service and held responsible to pay the claim of complainant. 

 

POINT (4):-

10.   In view of the above discussions on Point (1) to (3) we proceed to pass the following:-

 

 

ORDER

01.   For foregoing reasons the complaint stands allowed as against OP No.4 with costs of Rs.2,000/- as hereunder:-

 

(a) OP No.4 is herewith directed to give back the same items of complainant as booked as per receipt dated: 04.12.2017 vide GCN No.0200281.  If OP No.4 failed to give the same items OP No.4 should pay the amount of Rs.2,80,528/- i.e., the worth of the raw silk as per the tax invoice dated: 04.12.2017 to the complainant within 30 days from the date of pronouncement of this order.

 

(b)    OP No.4 is here with directed to pay compensation of Rs.8,000/- to the complainant.

(c)    Case against OP Nos.1, 2 & 3 is here with dismissed with no costs.

 

02.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 28^th DAY OF JULY 2018)

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                PRESIDENT