Delhi

StateCommission

A/07/807

LUNAR DIAMONDS LTD - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS - Opp.Party(s)

21 Aug 2017

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                                                       Date of Decision: 21.08.2017

First Appeal No. 807/2007

In the matter of:

Lunar Diamonds Ltd.

Through its Manging Director

Shri S.L. Maloo,

No.5, Ist Floor,

Atmaran Mansion,(Scindia House),

Connaught Place,

New Delhi.

 

Also its present address

Lunar Diamonds Ltd.,

D-15/4, Okhla Industrial Area,

Phase-I,

New Delhi.                                                                            .........Appellant

 

Versus

 

1.         The Union of India

            Through Secretary (P&T),

            New Delhi.                                                                             ..........Respondent no.1

 

2.         The Chief Post Master General,

            Meghdoot Bhawan,

            Jhandewalan,

            New Delhi-110055.                                                  ..........Respondent no.2

 

3.         The Manger,

            EMS Speed Post,

            Speed Post Center,

            Bhaivir Singh Marg,

            New Delhi.                                                                             ..........Respondent no.3

                                                                                   

CORAM

 

N P KAUSHIK                          -                  Member (Judicial)

 

1.         Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?                   Yes

2.         To be referred to the reporter or not?                                                                  Yes

 

Present :        Shri D.C. Aggarwal, counsel for the appellant.

                        Shri Anmol, counsel for the OP.

 

N P KAUSHIK – MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

 

JUDGMENT

Present appeal is directed against the orders dated 11.09.2006 passed by the District Forum-VI, New Delhi. Vide said orders ld. District Forum held that the complainant had failed to show that there was any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Complaint was thus dismissed.

 

          In brief the complainant gave a parcel weighting 300 gms to OP no.3 i.e. the Speed Post Centre, Bhai Vir Singh Marg, New Delhi. The parcel contained semi-precious stones. It was given on 24.07.93. The parcel bore two addresses on it, viz. (a) M/s. Shawmat Bank, 515,  Mess Avenue,  P.O. Box No.4093, Cambria Mess 02139 (USA) Philadelphia Account, (b) M/s. Nicca Imports, 1085, Common Wealth Building-105 N.B. Boston Mass-02215.

The grievance of the complainant was that the parcel was not delivered to the addressee. On inquiry, it was found that the parcel had been delivered to M/s. Nicca Imports, 1085, Commonwealth Building-105 N.B. Boston Mass-02215. It was reported that the parcel was received by one Mr. A. Brinkley .

          Ld. District Forum observed that as per procedure, consignment is sent to the bankers and not directly to the importer. In the present case, the address of the banker was wrong. Since the complainant himself had mentioned the address of the import, the parcel was delivered to the importer. Complainant’s own FAX dated 31.08.93 addressed to US Post  Texas, USA reads as under:-

                  

 

 

“……..

Please note that on telephonic contact with the proprietor of Nicca Imports, Miss Neerja has denied having received the delivery of this parcel and confirmed that there is no person such as A. Brinkley in her organization. She  also confirmed that this parcel was returned back by them.

……….”.

          Perusal of the abovesaid facts shows that the parcel was received by Nicca Imports and returned to the complainant. Letter dated 11.12.93 is thus of no avail to the complainant. I am, therefore, of the considered opinion that there is no infirmity or illegality in the orders passed by the Ld. District Forum.

          Before it may be mentioned here that the appellant/ complainant had been absenting himself from the proceedings since 17.12.2015. For this reasons and the reasons given above, present appeal is dismissed. File be sent to records.

 

 (N P KAUSHIK)
MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

 

 

 

 

 

NK