THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR
Consumer Complaint No. 462 of 2014
Date of Institution : 25.8.2014
Date of Decision : 17.06.2015
Shri Sukhwinder Singh son of S. Avtar Singh R/o D-6/94, Vikas Nagar, Khandwala Chowk, Chheharta,Amritsar
...Complainant
Vs.
Trackon Couriers Pvt.Ltd. , C-143, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase I, New Delhi 110028
Trackon Couriers Pvt.Ltd., Shop No. 517, Hide Market, Gali Asian Batteries, Amritsar through its Manager,S. Amrik Singh
Neha Couriers, Sandhu Colony, Sandhu Towers, G.T. Road, Opp.Petrol Pump, Chheharta, Amritsar through its Prop.Sh. Rahul Sharma
....Opp.parties
Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present : For the complainant : Sh. M.S.Chawla,Advocate
For the opposite parties No.1&2 : Sh. Deepinder Singh,Advocate
For opposite party No.3 : Sh. Naresh Maini,Advocate
Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member &
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member
-2-
Order dictated by :-
Bhupinder Singh, President
1 Present complaint has been filed by Sukhwinder Singh under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that on 29.8.2012 complainant delivered an envelope to opposite party No.3 for the purpose of courier to his employer i.e. Swaraj India Industries Limited, 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra, vide receipt No. 306540411 dated 29.8.2012 against cash payment of Rs. 60/- . Opposite party No.3 is a franchisee/agent of opposite party No.1 & 2 ,who are carrying the business of courier. The complainant submitted that the said envelope was containing TA bills for the months of June and July, 2012 and also the original bus tickets pertaining to the journey performed by the complainant during the said period for the purpose of claiming TA/DA . TA bill for June was amounting to Rs. 7547/- and for July was of Rs. 8490/-. Complainant has alleged that on the basis of the documents submitted through courier, the complainant was to receive payments as follows:-
Salary for June 2012 Rs. 17000/-
Salary for July 2012 Rs. 17000/-
TA for June 2012 Rs. 7547/=-
TA for July 2012 Rs.8490/-
Rs.50,037/-
-3-
2. Complainant was surprised to know that the said envelope did not reach the destination even after a considerable period , as such the complainant did not receive his salary as well as TA DA for the relevant period. The complainant made enquiries from opposite party No.3 and in reply thereof, he was told that they had sent the envelope to opposite party No.2. The complainant visited opposite party No.2 several times , but to no avail. Thereafter complainant approached opposite party No.3 who delivered the complainant challan No. 19639 dated 29.8.2012 which contained a list of envelops which the opposite party No.3 delivered to opposite party No.2. In this challan complainant's envelope stood listed at Sr.No. 10. This challan also contains initial /signatures of representative of opposite party No.2. The complainant again approached opposite party No.2 and requested them to apprise him about the fate of his envelope, but to no avail. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 50037/- alongwith interest . Compensation of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.
3. On notice, opposite parties No.1 & 2 appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary party as the alleged consignee M/s. Swaraj India Industries is a necessary party . It was submitted that opposite party No.3 is not the agent or franchisee of opposite parties No.1 & 2 , as such opposite parties No.1 & 2 have nothing to do with the activities
-4-
of opposite party No.3. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
4. Opposite party No.3 in its written version has admitted that on 29.8.2012 complainant delivered an envelope to opposite party No.3 for the purpose of courier to his employer i.e. Swaraj Industries Ltd., 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra vide receipt dated 29.8.2012 against cash payment of Rs. 60/-.It was further submitted that earlier opposite party No.3 was a franchisee/agent of opposite parties No.1 & 2 but now opposite party No.3 left the franchisee. It was denied that the envelope was containing complainant's TA bills for the months of June and July and also the original bus tickets pertaining to the journey performed by the complainant during the aforesaid period. Opposite party No.3 further denied that on the basis of the documents sent by the complainant to his employer through the aforesaid envelope the complainant has to receive the salary and TA/DA bills for the months of June and July 2012. While denying and controverting other allegations dismissal of complaint was prayed.
5. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-7.
6. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 tendered affidavit of Sh. A.S. Bajwa, Branch Mnager Ex.OP1,2/1.
7. Opposite party No.3 tendered affidavit of Sh. Raj Kumar Ex.OP3/1, copy of
-5-
courier receipt Ex.OP3/2, copy of challan form dated 29.8.2012 Ex.OP3/3, copy of bill No. 510 dated OP3/4, copy of bill No. 1951 Ex.OP3/5.
8. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the complainant and opposite party No.1 and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the parties.
9. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties , it is clear that on 29.8.2012 complainant handed over an envelope to opposite party No.3 for the purpose of courier to his employer i.e. Swaraj India Insutries Limited.,303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra, vide receipt No. 306540411 dated 29.8.2012 against cash payment of Rs. 60/- . The said receipt is Ex.C-3. The complainant submitted that opposite party No.3 is a franchisee/agent of opposite party No.1 & 2 who are carrying the business of courier. The complainant submitted that the said envelope was containing TA bills for the months of June and July and also the original bus tickets pertaining to the journey performed by the journey during the said period for the purpose of claiming TA/DA . TA bill for June was amounting to Rs. 7547/- for July was of Rs. 8490/-. The complainant has to receive his salary and TA/DA. As such on receipt of the aforesaid documents which were sent by the complainant to his employer through the envelope handed over to opposite party No.3 for delivery to
-6-
the consignee at Maharashtra. But the said envelope did not reach the destination even after a lapse of a considerable period. Resultantly the complainant did not receive his salary and TA, DA for the relevant period. The complainant approached the opposite party No.3 and the opposite party submitted reply that they had sent the envelope in question to opposite party No.2 for delivery at Maharashtra. The complainant approached opposite party No.2 but they did not give any satisfactory reply. The complainant also approached the opposite party No.3 again who delivered challan Ex.C-7 that they handed over the envelope to opposite party No.2 . But the said envelope did not reach the destination and was not delivered to the consignee as a result of which the complainant could not receive his salary as well as TA/DA for the relevant period. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
10. Whereas the case of opposite parties No.1 & 2 is that the complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary party as the alleged consignee M/s. Swaraj India Industries is a necessary party to the complaint to determine whether any consignment was sent and delivered to said M/s. Swaraj India IndustriesLtd., 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 categorically stated that opposite party No.3 is not the agent or franchisee of opposite parties No.1 & 2 , as such opposite parties No.1 & 2 have
-7-
nothing to do with the activities of opposite party No.3. Opposite party No.3 never handed over the envelope of the complainant to opposite party No.2. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 also denied the issuance of any challan Ex.C-7 nor it contains the signatures of any representative of opposite parties No.1 & 2. Opposite party No.3 has nothing to do with opposite parties No.1 & 2. Ld.counsel for opposite parties No.1 & 2 submitted that the complaint against opposite parties No.1 & 2 is liable to be dismissed.
11. Whereas case of opposite party No.3 is that on 29.8.2012 complainant delivered an envelope to opposite party No.3 for the purpose of courier to his employer i.e. Swaraj Industries Ltd., 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra, vide receipt dated 29.8.2012 Ex.C-3 against cash payment of Rs. 60/-. Opposite party No. 3 further submitted that earlier opposite party No.3 was a franchisee/agent of opposite parties No.1 & 2 . But now opposite party No.3 left the franchisee. Opposite party No.3 denied that the envelope was containing complainant's TA bills for the months of June and July and also the original bus tickets pertaining to the journey performed by the complainant during the aforesaid period. Opposite party No.3 further denied that on the basis of the documents sent by the complainant to his employer through the aforesaid envelope, the complainant has to receive the salary and TA/DA bills for the months of June and July 2012. Opposite party No.3 submitted that they had delivered/forwarded the
-8-
courier to opposite parties No.1 & 2 vide challan dated 29.8.2012 Ex.C-7. The item of the complainant is at Sr.No. 11 of Ex.C-7 . It was for the opposite parties No.1 & 2 to deliver the said envelope to the consignee at Maharashtra. Ld.counsel for opposite party No.3 submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party No.3 qua the complainant.
12. From the entire above discussion we have come to the conclusion that on 29.8.2012 complainant handed over the envelope to opposite party No.3 for transit and delivery to the consignee M/s. Swaraj India Industries, 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra vide receipt Ex.C-3 dated 29.8.2012. As such there is contract between the complainant and opposite party No.3 for delivery of the consignment i.e. envelope to the consignee at Maharashtra. This fact has been admitted by opposite party No.3 that complainant handed over one envelope for delivery to Swaraj India Industries Ltd., 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra, vide receipt Ex.C-3. But the said envelope did not reach the consignee at Maharashtra as alleged by the complainant. Opposite party No.3 has taken plea that they handed over the said envelope to opposite party No.2 vide challan Ex.C-7 for delivery to the consignee at Maharashtra. Whereas opposite parties No.1 & 2 have categorically denied that opposite party No.3 has delivered any envelope to opposite party No.2 for transit and delivery to the consignee at Maharashtra. The alleged challan Ex.C-7 does not
-9-
pertain to opposite party No.2 nor is signed by any person. The opposite party No.3 also did not summon any record from opposite party No.2 to prove that this challan Ex.C-7 was issued by opposite party No.2. Moreover this challan does not prove that the envelope of the complainant was handed over by opposite party No.3 to opposite party No.2. Moreover, no amount has been paid by opposite party No.3 to opposite party No.2 for this purpose. The column of amount is also inked, which proves that no amount was paid by opposite eparty No.3 to opposite party No.2 for this purpose. Further opposite party No.3 has alleged that they have franchisee/agency of opposite parties No.1 & 2 but opposite party No.3 could not produce any document or any oral evidence to prove that they were the agents or having franchisee of opposite parties No.1 & 2. As such opposite party No.3 has failed to prove on record the genuineness of this challan Ex.C-7 or that it was issued by opposite party No.2 . Opposite party No.3 has also failed to prove on record that they delivered the envelope of the complainant to opposite party No.2 for further delivery to the consignee at Maharashtra. As such opposite parties No.1 & 2 cannot be held responsible for non delivery of the envelope of the complainant to the consignee at Maharashtra. It is the opposite party No.3 who is responsible for not delivering the consignment i.e. envelope of the complainant to the consignee at Maharashtra.
13. As a result of non delivery of the consignment to the consignee at
-10-
Maharashtra , the complainant has suffered loss/harassment . The complainant has alleged that envelope was containing TA/DA bills of the complainant for the months of June and July and the bus fare tickets for the relevant period and he further alleged that the employer i.e. consignee Swaraj India Industries Ltd., 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra had to release salary of the complainant for the months of June and July on the basis of these proofs . But the complainant has failed to prove on record that the said envelope was containing the aforesaid documents because he neither handed over any list of documents containing in that envelope to opposite party No.3 nor the complainant could produce the duplicate copies of the documents. He has allegedly sent through the envelope to the consignee at Maharashtra . Not only this the complainant has also not produced any documents from Swaraj India Industries, 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra to prove that the complainant had worked in their company for the aforesaid period i.e. June and July 2012. The complainant has also failed to produce on record any correspondence made by him to his employer i.e. consignee Swaraj India Industries, 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra to the effect that he has not received the salary and TA/DA bills for the months of June and July 2012, whereas he has filed this complaint on 25.8.2014. As such we hold that complainant has badly failed to prove on record that what were the documents he has sent through the envelope in
-11-
question to the consignee at Maharashtra. He has also not produced any documents from his employer Swaraj Industries Ltd., 303-304, Industrial Area, Phalaton, District Sitara, Maharashtra that complainant remained their employee for the months of June and July 2012 and that his salary was being issued to the complainant only on receipt of his TA and DA bills as well as the bus tickets nor it can be believed that the complainant has not received his salary from the employer only on this ground and that too for more than two years as the complainant has filed the present complaint on 25.8.2014 i.e. after a lapse of a period of about two years. As such the plea of the complainant that he had not received the salary and TA/DA bills for the months of June and July 2012 due to non delivery of the aforesaid envelope to his employer i.e. consigned at Maharashtra , is not tenable.
14. However , the complainant has suffered loss and harassment due to non delivery of the consignment i.e. envelope of the complainant by opposite party No.3 to the consignee at Maharashtra. As such the complainant is entitled to compensation from opposite party No.3..
15. Resultantly present complaint is partly allowed with costs and opposite party No.3 is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5000/- to the complainant. Opposite party No.3 is also directed to pay litigation expenses Rs. 2000/- to the complainant. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
-12-
16. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
17.06.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
/R/ Member Member
