Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 377.
Instituted on : 13.08.2018.
Decided on : 06.03.2019.
M/s Lakshni Traders. N.H.10, Opp. Navbharat Industries & Central Bank of India Rohtak through its Proprietor Usha Gupta W/o Mukesh Kumar Mb. No.9996846128, Age 54 years.
.......................Complainant.
Vs.
- Tracton Couriers Pvt. Ltd., A-64, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110028 through its M.D./Director.
- Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd. Shop No.2, 3, Akashwani Chowk, Near Maan Hospital, Computer Market, Rohtak, Haryana through its Manager.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Vishvender Singh Dhull, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Ashok Kumar Authorised Representative for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant has sent certain machine cutting tools/goods to Motherson Techno Tools Ltd. A-2, Sector-84 Noida District Gautam Budh Nagar, worth Rs.158500/- excluding GST worth Rs.28530/- through the respondents vide receipt No.1104237391 dated 11.07.2018. That respondents had assured the complainant that goods will be delivered to the consignee within 48 hours alongwith e-way bill & delivery challan. That after 3 days of dispatch of these goods, when the goods did not reach the consignee, the complainant asked the same from the respondents, but they avoided the satisfactory reply under one pretext or the other. That complainant sent an email/reminder dated 19.7.18, 20.7.18 & 21.07.2018 to Rohtak branch & customer care asking them about his consignment, but the respondents failed to find the goods. That the goods have been lost by the respondent or theft of the goods have been taken place while delivering the goods. That on repeated complaints of the complainant, the respondents lodged lost property report on dated 23.07.2018. That the respondents have failed to provide services to the complainant & hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such it is prayed that the opposite parties may kindly be directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.187030/- and also to pay Rs.100000/- to the complainant for causing harassment, defamation and inconvenience to the complainant.
2. On notice opposite parties appeared and filed their written reply submitting therein that the consignment of the complainant got lost due to unfortunate circumstances while it was returned to Rohtak for return delivery to the complainant as the consignee refused to receive the consignment. The consignment got lost in Rohtak on 16.07.2018 while it was take out for return delivery to the complainant and despite a massive search the same could not be traced out. The respondents lodged a police report with Haryana Police on 23.07.2018. That no evidence whatsoever has been filed by the complainant to prove the alleged losses. That the complainant is not entitled to any reliefs claimed and dismissal of complaint has been sought
3. Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, document Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and has closed his evidence on dated 16.01.2019. On the other hand ld. counsel for the opposite party No.1 has tendered affidavit Ex.R1 and has closed his evidence on dated 01.02.2019.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case carefully.
5. In the present complaint, the complainant has placed on record several documents including the delivery challan, E-way bill, emails sent to the respondent officials, lost property report, courier receipt and status report etc. On the other hand the respondent has placed on record affidavit Ex.R1. The complainant booked a parcel on dated 11.07.2018 through respondent vide receipt No.1104237391.
6. A bare perusal of the documents shows that booked consignment could not reach at the destination. The complainant booked a consignment having certain machine cutting tools/goods to Motherson Techno Tools Ltd.A-2, Sector-84, Noida District Gautam Budh Nagar worth Rs.158530/- excluding GST on 11.07.2018. The respondent officials could not deliver the consignment to the consignee as the consignee refused to receive the consignment. Thereafter the consignment was returned back to Rohtak. As per the record of the written statement, the consignment got lost in Rohtak on 16.07.2018 while the same was taken out for returned delivery to the complainant. When the consignment was not delivered to the complainant, then the complainant approached to the respondent officials many times and also contacted through mails and remainders on various dates 19.07.2018, 20.07.2018 and 21.07.2018. As per Ex.C1, the complainant sent some items amounting to Rs.158500/- through the respondent no.2. As per respondent the amount has not been disclosed by the complainant at the time of booking of consignment with the respondent. The perusal of the receipt shows that an amount of Rs.300/- has been charged by the respondent as courier charges and the weight has been mentioned as 5.2kg, meaning thereby, the consignment was having some heavy items. The complainant disclosed regarding the value of consignment as Rs.158500/- in his mail dated 19.07.2018 and also attached the eway bill with the mail. The complainant also informed the respondent regarding the status of the delivery of the consignment. One reminder mail has also been sent by the complainant on dated 21.07.2018. After that the respondent officials lodged a complaint with the local police vide application No. 132370621803001 on dated 23.07.2018 and this fact has been mentioned in the affidavit Ex.R1 meaning thereby it was within the knowledge of the respondent officials that the value of the consignment is Rs.158500/- whereas in the report Ex.C4 lodged by the respondent, the estimated value of the property is mentioned as Rs.1 only. It is an afterthought of the opposite party and the less value has been mentioned in the report Ex.C4 by the respondent. As such there is grave deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is allowed and as such opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.158500/-
(Rupees one lac fifty eight thousand five hundred only) towards value of consignment alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 13.08.2018 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
06.03.2019.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
Ved Pal, Member.
…………………………………
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
