Presents:-

1. Sri P.Samantara,President.
2. Sri G.K.Rath, Member.

                      Dated,Bolangir the 16^th day of October 2015.

                      C.C.No.16 of 2015.

Tata Project Ltd. Represented through it’s Project in charge,

Tanmaya Kumar Nayak, Rajendrapada Bolangir Tow.

P.O/P.S/Dist- Bolangir.

                                                           ..              ..               Complainant.

                      -Versus-

DTDC, Bolangir Branch, Near Koshal Kalamandap,

BolangirTown, P.O/P.S/Dist- Bolangir,represented

Through it’s Branch in charge.

                                                           ..             ..                Opp.Parties.

Adv.for the complainant- None.

Adv.for Opp.Party.        – M/s.K.Sarangi &Associate.

                                                                            Date of filing of the case-28.02.2015

                                                                            Date of order                   - 16.10.2015

JUDGMENT.

Sri P.Samantara,President.

                 Complainant has sent three printers in 3 nos of packet on dt.27.01.2015 to TATA Project Ltd, Noida, U.P. vide consignment No.D 20401818 against paying consignment charges Rs 2,160/- by DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd, Bolangir.

2.              Further at the receiving end in opening, it is found the three printers have been completely broken and damaged which costs Rs 20,000/- .The O.P did not heeded to the loss raised and flatly refused to make good of the loss caused by him. Prayed the O.P may directed to pay the cost with compensation. Relied un attested photocopy and affidavit.

3.             On notice, the O.P appeared but did not file any written version since dt.24.3.2015.

4.             We find as per sub-section (4) of 28Athenotice is sufficient, we decides to proceed u/s sub section-2(a)(b) & ( c)  of Sec. 13 of C.P.Act, as on merit.

5.              Perusal of record reveals, the booking receipt photocopy is on the record. The complainant he has sent 3 nos printer by the courier, but it is not in the record the brand, make type and specification the printers are belonged with. No receipt of purchase and warranty card is available, even no money receipt has been adduced to substantiate the contents of cartoon in absence of same, we hold the case has no merit, in absence of any specific and substantive evidence on the product sent, so it is hereby dismissed.

                 The O.P is charged with for non giving the reply at the call of forum. So he is levied with penalty of Rs 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only, that to be deposited at “State Consumer Welfare fund” forthwith, failing which Rs 10/- per day will accrue on same till realization.

ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015.

                                             (G.K.Rath)                              (P.Samantara)

                                              MEMBER.                              PRESIDENT.