BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, VELLORE DISTRICT AT VELLORE. PRESENT: THIRU. A. SAMPATH, B.A., B.L., PRESIDENT THIRU. K. DHAYALAMURTHI,B.SC. MEMBER – II CC. 1 / 2008 WEDNESDAY THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2011. S.N. Ganapathyraja, S/o. Narayanan, No.4, Phase -5, T.N.H.B., Rangapuram, Vellore – 9. … Complainant. - Vs – 1. The Professional Couriers, Rep. by its Branch Manager, Main Centre T.K.V.S. Complex, 23 – 4526, Arcot Road, Vellore – 632 009. 2. The Professional Couriers, Rep by its Branch Manager, Head Officer, No.17/36, Catheral Garden Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34. … Opposite parties. . . . . This petition coming on for final hearing before us on 7.12.2011, in the presence of Thiru. K. Umashankar, Advocate for the complainant and Thiru. S. Varadhan, Advocate for the opposite parties, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Forum made the following: O R D E R Pronounced by Thiru. A. Sampath, President of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Vellore District. 1. The brief facts of the case of the complainant is as follows: The complainant had sent a book pocket to his daughter G. Priyadurga Kumarapalayam, Salem District on 26.6.07 through 1st opposite party booking No.4705347 2 Kg 500 gm but 1st opposite party has not delivered to the addressee at Kumarapalayam Salem. The 1st opposite party assured to complainant that the articles within all ticket of complainant’s daughter for examination of B.Sc., Nursing course IVth year to be held August 2007 will be delivered without any delay and charge the Rs.78/- the complainant paid the said couriers charges. But the 1st opposite party have failed to deliver the article. The non delivery of the articles were only due to the deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. He had issued a lawyer’s notice on 8.9.07 to opposite parties. The 2nd opposite party had issued reply lawyer’s notice dt.21.9.07 and stated the reply admitted the articles package was torn so the complainant daughter not take delivery there is also deficiency of service by the opposite parties in the discharge of their duties in respect of non delivery of the articles. The complainant claims a sum of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony. The opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.380/- B.Sc., Nursing Courses Book. The opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.50,458/-being loss of complainant estimate value and cost to sum of Rs.5000/- to this petition with interest at 12% p.a. Therefore the complainant prays this Forum for directing the opposite parties to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.55,458 with interest at 12% p.a. and award the cost of this complaint. 2. The averments in the counter filed by the 1st opposite party and adopted by the 2nd opposite party are as follows: The opposite party denies all the allegations in the petition except those that are specifically admitted herein. So the complainant is put to strict proof of the same by oral and documentary evidence. Excepting the fact that the complainant booked a parcel addressed to one G. Priya Durga, Kumarapalayam, Salem District on 26.6.07 with booking No.4705347 for delivery the other allegations are denied. The consignment reached the destination on time. When the same was offered for delivery, the consignee refused to take the same on the ground that the package was torn and the acquisition by the complainant otherwise is unwarranted. In fact from the date of the return of the consignment by the addressee it is lying with the opposite party and the consignor inspite of the intimation has not taken back the consignment, inspite of intimation personal visit and telephonic talk by the opposite party. They are entitled to claim demurrage as per law. On 9.7.07 the complainant gave a letter to the opposite party claiming for books as well as cloth which according to him its worth is Rs.1050/. There is absolutely no mention in the said letter of his having enclosed the Hall ticket to his daughter. It is beyond ones comprehension that the Hall Ticket of candidate to be with the parent, this itself is proof positive of the fact that the petitioner has not come to court with clean hands. His intention is only to blackmail the opposite party, a reputed firm to this filed and to claim damages impossible. The action of the complainant is highly illegal and unlawful and punishable under the Indian Penal Code, the opposite parties are reserving their right to take steps separately. As already stated, the consignment as it was sent is available, which he refused to take back when he came and gave the letter on 9.7.07. The allegations in para-3 that the opposite party gave assurance that the article with the Hall Ticket will be delivered without delay is palpable falsehood resorted to by the complainant for the purpose of maintaining this application. There was no notice and the opposite party is confused on the allegations made in para-5 which is without reference to the reply notice of the opposite party dt. 21.9.07, though the same is found in the list of documents as document No.6. The said reply notice is in complete answer to the claim made therein. As per the terms and conditions the non negotiable subject to standard conditions of carriage set forth on the reverse shall not be liable to any event for any specific incident on consequential damages including / irrespective of loss of income liability of carriage is limited to INR 100/- only for any cargo lost damaged / delayed or otherwise adversely affected, contents other than business documents must be accompanied by a declaration stating the values, full description, the reason for sending and origin. Therefore if there is any liability to be foisted on the opposite party it should be subjected to the terms and conditions binding on the parties. The complaint is devoid of merits lacks in bonafide and deserves to be dismissed with cost. 3. Now the points for consideration are: a) Whether there is any deficiency in service, on the part of the opposite parties? b) Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs asked for?. 4. Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 were marked on the side of the complainant and Ex.B1 was marked on the side of the opposite parties. Proof affidavit of the complainant and Proof affidavit of the opposite parties have been filed. No oral evidence let in by either side. 5. POINT NO. (a): It is admitted facts of the parties that the complainant booked a parcel address to his daughter G. Priyadurga Kumarapalayam, Salem District on 26.6.07 with 1st opposite party booking No.4705347, but the 1st opposite party has not delivered to the addressee at Kumarapalayam, Salem District. 6. The complainant contended that the 1st opposite party assured to complainant the articles within all ticket of complaint daughter for examination of B.Sc Nursing Course to be held August 2007 will be delivered without any delay and complainant has also paid Rs.78/- for courier charges. But the 1st opposite party have failed to deliver the article. Hence the non delivery of the articles were only due to the deficiency in service. The complainant sent the legal notice Ex.A3 to the opposite parties. The 2nd opposite party had issued reply lawyer’s notice dt.21.9.07 and stated the reply admitted the articles package was torn so the complainant daughter not take delivery there is also deficiency of service by the opposite parties in the discharge of their duties in respect of non delivery of the articles. 7. The opposite parties contented that the consignment reached the destination on time when the same was offered for delivery, the consignee refused to take the same on the ground that the package was torn and from the date of the return of the consignment by the addressee it is lying with the opposite party and the consignor inspite of the intimation has not taken back the consignment. It is further contended that as per the terms and conditions the non negotiable subject to standard conditions of carriage set forth on the reverse shall not be liable to any event for any specific incident on consequential damages including / irrespective of loss of income liability of carriage is limited to INR Rs.100/- only for any cargo lost damaged /delayed or otherwise adversely affected contents other than business documents must be accompanied by the declaration stating the value full description, the reason for sending and origin. 8. Admittedly the 1st opposite partly have failed to deliver the parcel booked by the complainant on 26.6.07. The complainant stated in his legal notice Ex.A3, dt. 8.9.07 that the non delivery of the articles were only due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and calls upon the opposite parties to pay Rs.78/- being the courier charges paid by the complainant and cost of book Rs.380/- and a sum of Rs.50,000/- being the damages sustained by complainant. The 1st opposite party has sent a reply notice Ex.A6, dt. 21.9.07 and stated that on 9.7.07 the complainant has given a letter to the 1st opposite party claiming for the books as well as the cloth which according to him is worth Rs.1050/- and there is absolutely no mention in the said letter about the complainant having enclosed the Hall Ticket of his daughter. Further, the parcel as it is available, which the complainant refused to take back when he came to the office of the 1st opposite party on the same day on 9.7.07 and it is also mentioned in the said reply notice that if the complainant fails to come and take delivery of the consignment within a week of the receipt of this notice the same will be auctioned as per law and after deducting the charges due to 1st opposite party the balance if any will be sent to him. But the complainant did not take any steps to return back the articles. However, it is admitted facts of the parties that 1st opposite party has not delivered the said parcel to the addressee at Kumarapalayam, Salem District. From the perusal of Ex.B1 a letter dt.9.7.07 sent to the 1st opposite party, it is mentioned as follows: “vdJ kfŸ Fkhughisa« fš#353; go¤J tU»wh®. go¥#161;fhd fš #164;jf« k‰W« fš il mD¥Ãa gh®rš ÏJehŸtiu »il¡f¥bgw#353;iy. j¡f elto¡if vL¤J cjÎkhW gâÎl‹ nf£L¡bfhŸ»nw‹. “ #164;jf kÂ¥ %.750/- il %.300/- ----------- %.1050/- ------------ j§fŸ c©ik#376;s, Therefore it is clear that the complainant did not mentioned in the above letter that the complainant having enclosed the Hall Ticket of his daughter. Further, the Ex.A1 is receipt for courier charges of Rs.78/- paid by the complainant to the 1st opposite party and the Ex.A2 is cash bill of Rs.380/- for the cost of nursing book, but there is no proof that the complainant having enclosed the college uniform and the Hall ticket of his daughter in the said parcel. 9. Hence, taking into account with regard to the contention of the complaint and the counter, as well as proof affidavit of the both the parties, and from the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 & Ex.B1, we have come to the conclusion that the attitude of the opposite parties herein, would have certainly committed deficiency in service. In such circumstances, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant herein has clearly proved the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties herein. Hence we answer this point (a) is accordingly. 10. POINT NO. (b): In view of our findings on point No.(a), the opposite parties are jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.78/- under Ex.A1 being the courier charges and to pay a sum of Rs.380/- under Ex.A2 towards B.Sc., Nursing book fee totally Rs.458/- i.e. rounded Rs.500/- to the complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the complainant by way of damages sustained by mental agony. Hence we answer this point (b) is also accordingly. 11. In the result, this complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.78/- under Ex.A1 being the courier charges and to pay a sum of Rs.380/- under Ex.A2 towards B.Sc., Nursing book fee totally Rs.458 i.e. rounded Rs.500/- to the complainant. They are also directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the complainant by way of damages sustained by mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards the cost of this complaint. The opposite parties are also hereby directed to pay the above said amounts within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the complainant is also entitled to interest on the above said sum @ 9% p.a. from the date of default till the date of payment. Dictated to the Steno-typist and transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by the President, in Open Forum, this the 21st day of December 2011. MEMBER-II PRESIDENT. List of Documents: Complainant’s Exhibits: Ex.A1- 26.6.07 - X-copy of the Courier Service charge Receipt. Ex.A2- 26.6.07 - X-copy of B.Sc., Nursing Book bill for Rs.380/- Ex.A3- 8.9.07 - X-copy of legal notice. Ex.A4- -- - X-copy of Ack. Card. Ex.A5- -- - X-copy of Ack. Card. Ex.A6- 10.9.07 - X-copy of Reply notice. Opposite parties’ Exhibits: Ex.B1- 9.7.07 - X-copy of letter by the complainant to the opposite party-1. MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
| | [HONABLE MR. Hon'ble Tr K.Dhayalamurthy, Bsc] MEMBER[ Hon'ble Thiru A.Sampath, B.A., B.L] PRESIDENT | | 
