In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.374/2010
1) Alex Schrijver,
Flat A3 – 1103, Elita Promenade,
J.P. Nagar 7th Phase4, Bangalore-560078,
Karnatake, India. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Urbano Home Décor Pvt Ltd.,
Lower Ground Floor, South City Mall,
375, Prince Anwar Shah Road, Kolkata-68 and
48A Taratala Road, Kolkata-88.
2) GATI, UCA Deptt.,
Jubilee Godown, 11th Mile Stone,
Tumkur road, Madhavara Post, Bangalore-562123. ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 22 Dated 28-05-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that complainant purchased one centre table from o.p. no.1 and before purchased the complainant enquired from o.p. no.1 whether the said table could be delivered at Bangalore and o.p. no.1 assured that the same could be delivered at the Bangalore address of the complainant safely. Complainant on the basis of such assurance purchased the said centre table from o.p. no.1.
O.p. no.1 sent the centre table to the complainant through o.p. no.2 who is a courier and transport company. The representative of o.p. no.2 on 14.7.09 without giving any prior intimation came to the residence of complainant and met contact over phone that they were waiting in front of the residence of the complainant at Bangalore for delivery of the said centre tab le when the complainant was in office and requested them to wait for an hour but the representative of o.p. n.2 stated that they could not wait for an hour and stated that they would come against on the next day and for such coming the complainant has to pay Rs.200/- as charged for their coming the complainant without finding any other alternative agreed to pay the said charges.
On 25.7.09 at about 9-00 a.m. the representative of o.p. no.2 again came at the residence of complainant when complainant requested to the representative of o.p. no.2 to unpack the consignment before delivery and on such request they unpacked the said consignment and it was found that the said centre table with marble top is not only broken in middle and also at ground.
Complainant requested the representative of o.p. no.2 to wait for sometime so that the complainant could contact with o.p. no.1 for further steps, but the representative of o.p. no.2 were so impatient and did not agree to wait further and requested the complainant to put his note that he did not agree to accept the consignment and the complainant accordingly gave the note stating that he was not in the position to accept the consignment as the same was in broken condition. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.p. no.2 had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.p. no.2 in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. O.p. no.1 did not contest the case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against o.p. no.1.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that complainant purchased one centre table from o.p. no.1 and before purchased the complainant enquired from o.p. no.1 whether the said table could be delivered ata Bangalore and o.p. no.1 assured that the same could be delivered at the Bangalore address of the complainant safely. Complainant on the basis of such assurance purchased the said centre table from o.p. no.1.
We further find that o.p. no.1 sent the centre table to the complainant through o.p. no.2 who is a courier and transport company. The representative of o.p. no.2 on 14.7.09 without giving any prior intimation came to the residence of complainant and met contact over phone that they were waiting in front of the residence of the complainant at Bangalore for delivery of the said centre tab le when the complainant was in office and requested them to wait for an hour but the representative of o.p. n.2 stated that they could not wait for an hour and stated that they would come against on the next day and for such coming the complainant has to pay Rs.200/- as charged for their coming the complainant without finding any other alternative agreed to pay the said charges.
It is seen from the record that on 25.7.09 at about 9-00 a.m. the representative of o.p. no.2 again came at the residence of complainant when complainant requested to the representative of o.p. no.2 to unpack the consignment before delivery and on such request they unpacked the said consignment and it was found that the said centre table with marble top is not only broken in middle and also at ground.
Thereafter, complainant requested the representative of o.p. no.2 to wait for sometime so that the complainant could contact with o.p. no.1 for further steps, but the representative of o.p. no.2 were so impatient and did not agree to wait further and requested the complainant to put his note that he did not agree to accept the consignment and the complainant accordingly gave the note stating that he was not in the position to accept the consignment as the same was in broken condition.
In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that o.ps. had sufficient deficiency in service being service provider to their consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed ex parte with cost against o.p. no.1 and on contest with cost against o.p. no.2. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to refund Rs.17,500/- (Rupees seventeen thousand five hundred) only to the complainant being the cost of the centre table and compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
