Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/417/2022

The Managing Director Professional Courier No.17 Cathedral Garden Road Nungambakkam -34 and others - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vallinarayanan No L 238 Housing Unit Nasiyanoor Road Phase 2 Erode - Opp.Party(s)

Sathiyanarayanan

28 Oct 2022

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

 

                             BEFORE :       Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. SUBBIAH                                       PRESIDENT

                                            Thiru R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                       MEMBER

                        

F.A.NO.417/2022

(Against order in CC.NO.24/2020 on the file of the DCDRC, Erode)

 

DATED THIS THE 28^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2022   

 

1.       The Managing Director

          The Professional Courier

          17, Cathedral Garden Road

          Gangaikaraipuram

          Nungambakkam- 600 034

 

2.       The Manager

          The Professional Courier

          Trichy Main Road, New Housing Unit

          Thanjavur – 613 005

 

3.       The Manager

          The Professional Courier                            M/s. R. Sathyanarayanan

          58A, Balusubrayalu Veedhi                                   Counsel for

          Gandhiji Road, Erode – 638 001             Appellants / Opposite parties

 

                                                         Vs.

M. Vallinarayanan

S/o.Madhavan

No.L-238, Housing Unit                                        

Nasiyanur Road Phase – 2                                             In person

Erode – 638 011                                                Respondent/ Complainant

 

          The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Commission allowed the complaint. Against the said exparte order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt.29.7.2022 in CC. No.24 /2020.

 

          This petition coming before us for hearing finally today.  Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel for appellant, and the Respondent appered in person, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Commission, this commission made the following order in the open court:

 

 

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH ,  PRESIDENT  (Open court)

 

1.      The opposite parties before the District Commission are the appellants herein.

2.    The case of the complainant before the District Commission is that complainant had booked a cover containing paintings, addressed to one Mr.Meenakshinath at Thanjavur.  The said Meenakshinath had assured the complainant to show the paintings to one Mr.Balasubramaniam.  The courier was booked on 31.8.2020, and the complainant had informed the female staff who was in the office of the opposite party that the cover containing important documents, to be delivered on the next day without fail.  Therefore, the female staff of the opposite party also affixed a sticker as “special” on the cover.  But to his shock and surprise the cover had not been delivered to the opposite party.  If the cover had been delivered in time, and it was shown to Mr.Balasubramaniam, he would have sanctioned Rs.50000/- to the complainant.  Since the cover had not been delivered in time, he could not get the money, since the said director Mr.Balasubramaniam died due to corona on 7.9.2020.  Thus alleging negligence on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission claiming compensation. 

 

3.       The Appellants/ opposite parties, though appeared through counsel  before the District Commission, failed to file their written version, hence they were set exparte, and an exparte order was passed in favour of the Respondent/ complainant by holding that the service of the opposite parties is deficient, and thus directed the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.50000/- towards compensation and cost of Rs.5000/-.  Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties, praying for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merit. 

 

4.       Before this commission the opposite parties would contend that the complainant had booked two covers, out of which one cover addressed to the Director, South Zone Cultural Centre was delivered, and other one was addressed to one Mr.Meenakshinath.  The said cover also had been delivered to the same office, with the instruction to deliver the cover to Mr.Meenakshinath, since she was not available at the time of delivery.   The non-appearance before the District Commission is neither willful nor wanton.  They have a fair chance of succeeding the complaint.  Thus prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merit.

 

5.       The Respondent/ complainant appeared in person before this commission. 

 

6.       Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and the Respondent appeared in person we are of the considered opinion that a chance may be given to the opposite parties to agitate their right on merit.  Eventhough on considering the lethargic attitude of the opposite parties in not filing their written version though preferred to enter appearance, we are inclined to allow this appeal on imposing a sum of Rs.5000/- towards cost to the Respondent appeared in person, which was complied with. The Respondent appeared in person, received the cost.  Hence this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law. 

 

7.       In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Erode, in C.C.No.24/2020 dt.29.7.2022, and the matter is remanded back to the District Commission, Erode, for fresh disposal according to law on merit.

Parties are directed to appear before the District Commission, Coimbatore on 28.11.2022, for taking further instructions. On which date itself, the opposite parties shall file their Written version, proof affidavit, and documents if any. The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint, with the two months from the date of appearance, according to law on merit.  

The amount deposited, by the appellant, shall remain in the custody of this commission, till the order passed in original complaint.

 

 

 

   R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                R. SUBBIAH

                 MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT