Punjab

Sangrur

CC/517/2016

Pargat Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Trackon Couriers Pvt. Limited - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

03 Jan 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                                                           

                                                Complaint No.  517

                                                Instituted on:    30.08.2016

                                                Decided on:       03.01.2017

 

Pargat Singh urf Pargat Singh Satoj son of Mela Singh, resident of Village Satouj, Post Office Dharam Garh, Tehsil Sunam and District  Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.             Trackon Couriers Pvt. Ltd. A-64, Nariana, Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi 110 028 through its Managing Director/Chairman.

2.             Jiwan Kumar Proprietor, Trackon Courier Service, City Road, Sunam, Tehsil Sunam, Distt. Sangrur.                                                                                  …Opposite parties

 

For the complainant  :               Shri Rajan Kapil, Adv.

For OPs                    :               Shri Ramit Pathak, Adv.

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                Sarita Garg, Member

                Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Pargat Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant is a writer of Punjabi and has got printed five books.  The case of the complainant is that he availed the service of the OP number 2 by sending the bills to the Indian Sahitya Academy for reimbursement  vide courier receipt number 1303486887 on 22.7.2016. It is further averred that though the OP number 2 assured that the same will reach to the addressee within reasonable time, but the same never reached to the addressee. It is further averred that the complainant approached so many times to the OP number 2 as well as called the head office of the Ops on telephone, but nothing happened.  It is further averred that by this way due to the negligence of the OP, the complainant suffered a loss of Rs.18774/-, as the original bills have been lost by the OPs during transit.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to pay him the amount of Rs.18,774/- along with interest and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by OPs, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands, that the complainant has concealed material facts from this Forum and that this Forum has got no jurisdiction to hear and try the present complaint. On merits, it has been admitted that the complainant had sent some documents through the Ops to be delivered at Delhi, but it has been denied for want of knowledge that there were some bills as alleged by the complainant. It is stated further that if there were valuable documents, then the complainant should get the same insured. It is admitted that the OPs had charged Rs.30/- from the complainant as usually charged for regular documents.  It is stated further that the bag containing the packet of the complainant along with other packets was stolen from Delhi on 25.7.2016 without any fault of the employee of OP number 1. It has been denied that the complainant suffered any loss due to the loss of the packet.  Further it is stated that in case of theft of any packet of documents, the liability of the OPs is up to Rs.100/- only.  The other allegations levelled in the complaint have been denied.

 

3.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 copy of courier receipt, Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-4 copies of letters, Ex.C-5 copy of local travel detail, Ex.C-6 copy of diet expenses, Ex.C-7 and Ex.C-8 to Ex.C-16 copies of railway tickets and hotel bills and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has produced Ex.OPs/1 copy of application to SHO Delhi, Ex.OPs/2 copy of ordinary receipt, Ex.OPs/3 copy of premium receipt, Ex.OPs/4 copy of terms and conditions, Ex.OPs/5 copy of status of courier and Ex.OPs/6 affidavit and closed evidence.

 

4.             We have very carefully perused the complaint, written reply and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

 

5.             It is an admitted fact that the complainant availed the services of the OPs by getting booked his packet containing various original documents vide receipt dated 22.7.2016 by paying the requisite consideration of Rs.30/- for onward delivery to the addressee at Delhi.  It is further an admitted fact that the said packet containing the documents was lost by the OPs during transit, which was never delivered to the addressee.  Further Ex.C-4 is the copy of letter sent by the complainant to Indian Sahitaya Academy whereby he sent the bills to the tune of Rs.18774/- for payment.  But, on the other hand, the stand of the OP is that the bag containing various packets including one of the complainant was stolen on 25.7.2016 at Delhi and information of the same was also given to the Station House Officer, New Delhi.  No doubt, the OP has given the information to the Police of Delhi, but no copy of such FIR/DDR has been produced on record to establish the fact that actually any FIR was recorded in the police station.  Further the learned counsel for the Ops has contended vehemently that the maximum liability of the OPs is Rs.100/- only in case of any loss of the article/parcel.

 

6.             The Ops has produced nothing on record to show that at the time of booking of the parcel the complainant was apprised that if the parcel in question is lost, then the maximum liability of the OPs shall be Rs.100/- only.  Further there is nothing on record produced by the Ops that any signature of the complainant were obtained after apprising the conditions of the booking of parcel as contended by the OPs.  The copy of blank receipt produced by the OPs Ex.OPs/2 and Ex.OPs/3 are not at all helpful to the case of the OPs as it does not bear the signatures of any of the parties.  We may mention that both the parties have not produced the original receipt duly issued by the OP number 2 to the complainant for our perusal of the terms and conditions allegedly printed on the backside of the same.  In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the OPs have failed to establish on record that their maximum liability in case of loss of the parcel/packet is Rs.100/- only.  Further in the present case the complainant who is a writer sent various bills for Rs.18,774/- to the Indian Sahitya Academy for reimbursement, but due to loss of parcel he suffered heavy mental tension and harassment.  In the circumstances, we find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

 

7.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.15,000/- in lieu of consolidated compensation for mental tension agony and harassment and further to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5000/- on account of litigation expenses.

 

8.             This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                January 3, 2017.

 

                                                (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                     President

                               

 

 

                                                 

                                                    (Sarita Garg)

                                                       Member

 

 

                                                (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                       Member