Date of Filing : 07.05. 2009
Date of Order : 24.02.2016.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B., : MEMBER I
DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II
C.C.NO.780/2009
WEDNESDAY THIS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016
Mr. Shantanu Chatterjee,
S/o. Ramakrishna Chatterjee,
No.18, Kattabomman Street,
Ambal Nagar,
Ekkatuthangal,
Chennai 600 032. ..Complainant
..Vs..
1. The Regional Manager,
DTDC Courier and Cargo Limited,
136, Velachery Main Road,
Little Mount, Saidapet,
Chennai 600 016.
2. The Chairman & Managing Director,
DTDC Courier and Cargo Limited,
No.3, Victoria Road,
Bangalore 560 047. ..Opposite parties.
For the Complainant : M/s. V. Ravi & other
For the Opposite parties : M/s. G. Ramji & another
Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. Complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as damages for loss of the Decree Certificates and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as deficiency of service and cost of the complaint to the complainant.
ORDER
THIRU. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN :: MEMBER-II
1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:
The complainant had sent a courier cover (containing original certificates) vide the opposite party consignment Note No.K22974248 dated 12.5.2007 from the branch office at Durgapur Calcutta to Chennai. But it has not been delivered to the complainant. Hence he had approached the opposite party ‘s office at Saidapet Chennai followed by his letter dated 16.8.2007 seeking the where about of the consignments sent through courier from their Branch office were the consignment was booked. Since there is no proper response the complainant had approached Citizen Consumers and Civic Action Group which is a nonprofit, non political, professional organization working for the rights of the consumer in Chennai to get the redressal for the issue the complainant had faced. The CAG had sent a letter on 13.9.2007 to the opposite party to respond for the grievances of the complainant. The opposite party had replied to his letter on 22.9.2007 stating that “we will revert to you on this case within five business working days.” But they had not responded as promised. Hence the CAG has sent a letter on 12.10.2007 to the opposite party if they are not responding within seven days action will be initiated with the respective forum for redressing the grievance of the complainant. There is no response from the opposite party. As such the act of the opposite parties is amounts to deficiency of service. As such the complainant sought for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as damages for loss of the Degree Certificates and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as deficiency of service and cost of the complaint to the complainant. Hence the complaint.
Written version opposite party is as follows:
2. It denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein. It is true that a consignment was sent by Durgapur Branch, Kolkata to the complainant on 12.5.2007. The opposite party was not aware of the nature, value and contents of the consignment. The consignor had mentioned only incomplete address of the complainant and this is the reason why the consignment had got misrouted. They are not liable for any loss or damage to goods and their liability is restricted to a sum Rs.100/-. The consignment had not reached the complainant only from the letter dated 13.9.2007. In any event the complainant ought to have lodged a complaint it should have been within 30 days from the date of consignment since beyond that it would be like searching for a needle in a hay stack as there are several consignments dispatched day-to-day. It was not informed to the opposite party within this time. There has been no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3. Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 were marked on the side of the complainant. Proof affidavit of Opposite parties filed and no document were marked on the side of the opposite parties.
4. The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs asked for?.
5. POINTS 1 & 2 :
Perused the complaint filed by the complainant and his proof affidavit and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 were marked on the side of the complainant. Written version filed by the opposite parties and also considered the both side arguments.
6. The complainant had sent a courier cover vide the opposite parties consignment Note No.K22974248 dated 12.5.2007 from the branch office at Durgapur Calcutta to Chennai. But it has not been delivered to the complainant. Hence he had approached the opposite party ‘s office at Saidapet Chennai followed by his letter dated 16.8.2007 seeking the where about of the consignments sent through courier from their Branch office were the consignment was booked. Since there is no proper response the complainant had approached Citizen Consumers and Civic Action Group which is a nonprofit, non political, professional organization working for the rights of the consumer in Chennai to get the redressal for the issue the complainant had faced. The CAG had sent a letter on 13.9.2007 to the opposite parties to respond for the grievances of the complainant. The opposite party had replied to their letter on 22.9.2007 stating that “we will revert to you on this case within five business working days.”. But they had not responded as promised. Hence the CAG has sent a letter on 12.10.2007 to the opposite parties if they are not responding within seven days action will be initiated with the respective forum for redressing the grievance of the complainant. Hence there is no response from the opposite parties he filed the complaint in this forum seeking damages for the loss of certificates sent in the courier cover to be delivered at Chennai thereby a lost to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- and for deficiency of service and breach of stressed claiming Rs.2,00,000/- and grant the cost of the complaint.
7. The opposite parties denies the averments narrated by the complainant and there is no dispute on receiving the consignment by their Durgapur branch office ‘Calcutta for a consideration as mentioned in the consignment note submitted by the complainant under Ex.A1. The opposite parties stated that the consignee had mentioned only in complete address of the complainant and this was the reason why the consignment has got miss-routed, the opposite parties submitted that they are not liable for any loss or damage and restricted their liability to pay a sum of Rs.100/-. The opposite parties states that in any event the complainant ought to have lodged a complaint within 30 days from the date of consignment since beyond that it could be like searching for needle in a hay stack. Inspite of all this, took frantic efforts to search the consignment but in vain. It is prayed by the opposite party to dismiss the complaint.
8. On perusal of the records this complaint was dismissed for default by this forum on 19.7.2011 the opposite party present, complainant absent, proof affidavit of complainant was not filed, proof affidavit of opposite party already filed, complainant called absent since the complainant had not filed proof affidavit and no representation, the complainant called absent, the complaint is dismissed for default. Followed this the complainant filed an appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission vide F.A. No.318/2013 the appellate appeared before the State Commission and on hearing the arguments of counsel on both sides in the open forum, an order was passed to set aside the appeal submitted by the complainant to restore the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chennai South. The parties were directed to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chennai South on 19.9.2014 and it is directed to dispose of case a fresh within six month from the date of appearance.
9. As per the order of the Hon’ble State Commission remanded back of fresh disposal and both the parties were presented on 19.9.2014 and heard both sides arguments and the written arguments filed by both complainant and the opposite parties and it is observed that the complainant had not received or not found where about of the consignment given to the opposite parties and the opposite parties have replied that the Hon’ble forum does not have the jurisdiction and maintainability in this case which could not be agreed or accepted by this forum since the cause of action i.e. the consignment sent to Chennai and complainant resides in Chennai.
10. In view of the forgoing findings we are of the considered view that the opposite parties should have returned the consignment to the sender when the address of the complainant is not clear or proper which was not done so. This itself proves there is a deficiency of service of the opposite parties and moreover the opposite parties themselves agreed they have taken efforts to ascertain the consignment’s where abouts but in vain. Hence we are of the considered view that the opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- for litigation charges to the complainant. As such the points 1 & 2 are answered in favour of the complainant.
In the result, this complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order, failing which the above said compensation amount (Rs.10000/-) will also carry interest @ of 9% p.a. from the date of this order to till the date of payment.
Dictated directly by the Member-II to the Assistant, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the Member-II and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 24th day of February 2016.
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s side documents :
Ex.A1- 12.5.2007 - Copy of Courier Receipt.
Ex.A2- 16.8.2007 - Copy of letter from complainant.
Ex.A3- 13.9.2007 - Copy of letter from Consumer Action Group
Ex.A4- 22.9.2007 - Copy of reply letter from the 2nd opposite party.
Ex.A5- 12.10.2007 - Copy of letter from Consumer Action Group.
Opposite parties’ side documents:
.. Nil ..
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
