BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.229/2019

DATED ON THIS THE 22^nd August 2022

Present:   1) Sri. B.Narayanappa

M.A., LL.B., - PRESIDENT  

                     2) Smt.Lalitha.M.K.,

M.A., B.A.L., LL.B., - MEMBER  

                        3) Sri Maruthi Vaddar,

                                                B.A., LLB (Special)  - MEMBER

Sri MARUTHI VADDAR,

MEMBER

1. This is a complaint filed by the complainant Smt. Sunanda, W/o Madavaraj, resident of Mysuru under Section 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986 against the opposite party – Professional Couriers Service, Mysuru directing the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.90,000/- which includes value of the saree, interest, court fee and other incidental charges and compensation.   
2. The brief facts of the complaint is as here under:-

It is alleged in the complaint that on 12.07.2018, the complainant sent saree value Rs.18,000/- by courier through opposite party to one A.Nataraja Silk, No.18, Kandaswamy Street, Sydapete, Arini-632301 (Uma Silk (Crop) dated 06.07.2018, GST No.29DUP59472R1ZL). The said saree had not been reached to the consignee or not returned to the consigner.In this regard on 18.08.2018, the complainant wrote a letter to the opposite party and one Pallavi.N. has received and put her signature and seal on the letter and thereafter, the Manager of the opposite party Uday Shankar.N. has given endorsement on 20.09.2018 and gave evasive answer.Being mentally upset, this complaint has been initiated by the complainant.

3. After registration of the complaint, the notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party and in response to the notice, the opposite party appeared through its counsel and filed version.  It is the contention of the opposite party that the complaint of the complainant is not maintainable either in law or on facts.
4. It is true and admitted by the opposite party that the complainant is the Proprietor of Rakesh Sarees, No.15, 4^th Cross, Gokulam, Park Road, V.V.Mohalla, Mysuru and she is doing retail business selling of sarees to its customers for the benefit.  It is not admitted by this opposite party that the complainant sent a parcel of saree worth Rs.18,000/- through this opposite party on 12.07.2018 and the complainant has not mentioned the contents of the parcel prescribed and this opposite party has received the courier without knowing the contents in the consignment.  It is denied about the complaint being filed against opposite party on 18.08.2018 and opposite party has dodged the complainant. It is false that opposite party has given irresponsible answer and is not cared the complainant.  Opposite party denied the parcel contents of saree worth Rs.18,000/-.  On 11.07.2018, the consignment came to address of Umasilk in an ordinary booking service of this opposite party is received by one Madhavakumar, on the risk of consigner in case of loss or missing of such letter/consignment while in transit or wrong/mis-delivery.  The opposite party has explained the consigner regarding terms and conditions in case of loss or missing of such letter/consignment while in transit or wrong/mis delivery.  The consigner after accepting the terms and conditions printed on the receipt has signed the consignment receipt and the opposite party has issued the receipt on the request of the consigner in the ordinary course.  The alleged consignment is not insured with this opposite party and the complainant did not utilized the special course as the contents of the consignment is worth more than Rs.100/- and the opposite party liability is limited to Rs.100/- per consignment and the opposite party made all efforts to find out the consignment. That the complainant has come up with false complaint suppressing the truth only to have unlawful gain if possible and hence, prays to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.     
5. The complainant has filed her affidavit by way of examination in chief and the same was taken as P.W.1 and the documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4.  On the other hand, the opposite party has filed his affidavit by way of examination in chief and the same was taken as R.W.1 and not produced any documents.   
6. Heard the arguments of the counsel for opposite party and perused the complaint averments and documents produced by complainant.
7. The points that would arise for our consideration are as here under:-  

1. Whether the complainant proves the alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and thereby she is entitled to the reliefs as sought for?
2.  What order?

8.       Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

      Point No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative.

      Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

9.       Point No.1:- It is the specific case of the complainant that she had sent saree wroth Rs.18,000/- to Uma Silk Crop through opposite party on 12.07.2018.  But, the said saree was not reached to the consignee address nor returned to the consigner.  But, on 18.08.2018 the complainant wrote a letter to opposite party and one Pallavi.N. had received it and put her signature and seal on it. Thereafter, the Manager of the opposite party Udayshankar.N has sent an acknowledgement on 20.09.2018 with evasive answer and hence, the complainant filed this complaint against the opposite party.  To substantiate this, the complainant has been examined herself as P.W.1 and got marked certain documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4.  The complainant reiterated the averments of the complaint in her chief affidavit.  Ex.P.1 is the receipt issued by the opposite party having received the parcel on 11.07.2018.  Ex.P.2 is the letter given by the complainant to opposite party in which one Pallavi.N. has put her signature and seal.  Ex.P.3 is the receipt for having purchased the saree by the complainant.  Ex.P.4 is the acknowledgement forwaded by the Manager of opposite party.  After the affidavit of complainant, opposite party has also filed his affidavit and the same was taken as R.W.1. and not produced any documents in support of its case.  After affidavit of both parties, only opposite party has filed its written arguments and the complainant not addressed any arguments.  After careful perusal of the complaint averments and the documents filed along with it and the defence of the opposite party, it is noticed that the complainant has sent saree to Uma Silk Crop through opposite party by courier.  It is the case of the complainant that on 12.07.2018 she sent the saree worth Rs.18,000/- through the opposite party.  But, the receipt produced by her revealed that the courier sent on 11.07.2018.  The complainant is not sure on which date she sent the courier.  It is the contention of the opposite party that the opposite party had received the cover/parcel without knowing the contents in the consignment.  The alleged consignment is not insured with this opposite party and the complainant did not utilized this special course as the contents of the consignment is worth more than Rs.100/- and the liability of the opposite party is limited only to Rs.100/- per consignment and the consigner has not declared the true contents and its value though it is compulsory to register the consignment by the opposite party.  The contention of the opposite party will strengthen its defence as receipt given by it on its back, the opposite party has stated clearly about conditions to be followed by the consigner while making courier parcel and liabbility is also limited.  Such being the matter, the complainant has to state clearly about consignment and its value.  But, the complainant has not stated regarding this.  Hence, it is on the part of the complainant to inform the opposite party regarding the parcel.  Moreover, the complainant has not insured the said parcel as per the conditions of the opposite party.  Opposite party has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi reported in I CPJ 1995 page No.9 (NC) which is helpful to the opposite party.  Hence, the complainant has partly proved her case.  Hence, we answer the point No.1 partly in the affirmative.
10. Point No.2:- For the aforesaid reasons, we proceed to pass the following

:: ORDER ::

1. The complaint filed by complainant is allowed in part.
2. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.400/- as the four times to the charges of Rs.100/- payable by the complainant while sending the parcel through the opposite party within one month from the date of this order.   
3. The opposite party further directed to pay Rs.1,000/- towards mental agony, deficiency in service caused to the complainant and Rs.1,000/-towards cost of litigation within 1 months from the date of this order.  In default, Rs.400/- + Rs.1,000/- + Rs.1,000/- totally Rs.2,400/- will carry interest at 10% p.a. till its payment
4. Furnish the copy of order to both parties at free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, corrected by us and then pronounced in open Commission on this the 22^nd August, 2022)