Date of Filing:08.08.2022

Date of Disposal:29.05.2023

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BENGALURU

1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027.

ORDER

SRI RAMACHANDRA.M.S,PRESIDENT

1. The complainants files a complaint with this Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 with a direction to OP pay the cost of Rs.49,990/- paid by the complainant at the time of purchase, to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/-  being the compensation for damages caused to the goods, Rs.25,000/- being the compensation for deficiency of service, hardship, financial loss etc. and grant  such other reliefs.

2.  The following are the complaint's key facts:

This is the case of the complainant that complainant has availed Packers and Movers of goods service from the OP. The complainant has handed over the some of the movable goods to the OP for shifting from Bengaluru to Chikkamagaluru. The OP has indulge in business of transportation of the goods from one place to another place. They have accepted and rightly agreed to render the service of transportation of goods from Bengaluru to Chikkamagaluru. The OP have also agreed to render the service by charging service charges of Rs.18,900/-. This charge was paid by the complainant and consequently all the movable goods were handed over to the OP for transportation of the same from one place to another place. It is the case of the complainant that when the goods were delivered, the complainant alleges that one item was damaged during transit and it is also alleged that one item i.e. T.V. is not delivered at the time of delivering entire goods. By alleging deficiency in service the complainant has maintained the present complaint and sought for the reliefs of compensation for the alleged deficiency in the service on the part of the OP

3. Notice to OP-duly served, represented by counsel, despite of sufficient opportunity the OP fails to file version within  statutory period of 45 days. Hence, version and affidavit of OP is taken as not filed. OP files written arguments.

4. The complainant filed chief-examination affidavit along with relevant in support of his contention.

5. Heard arguments. The matter is reserved for order.

6. The points that arise for our consideration are;

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable?
2. Whether the Complainant prove that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP as alleged in the complaint and thereby prove that he is entitle for the relief sought?
3. What order?

7. The findings on the above points are as under:

Point No.1                :Negative.

Point No.2                :Does not arise for consideration as per findings given in point no.1.

Point No.3                : As per order

REASONS

8. POINT NO.1:-From the perusal of complaint averments and also allegations of the complainant as against the OP, it is clear that the complainant has availed Packers and Movers of goods service from the OP. The complainant has handed over the some of the movable goods to the OP for shifting from Bengaluru to Chikkamagaluru. The OP has indulge in business of transportation of the goods from one place to another place. They have accepted and rightly agreed to render the service of transportation of goods from Bengaluru to Chikkamagaluru. The OP have also agreed to render the service by charging service charges of Rs.18,900/-. This charge was paid by the complainant and consequently all the movable goods were handed over to the OP for transportation of the same from one place to another place. It is the case of the complainant that when the goods were delivered, the complainant alleges that one item was damaged during transit and it is also alleged that one item i.e. T.V. is not delivered at the time of delivering entire goods. By alleging deficiency in service the complainant has maintained the present complaint and sought for the reliefs of compensation for the alleged deficiency in the service on the part of the OP.

9. OP filed writtenarguments, wherein they have denied entire allegations and any deficiency on their part during the course of service to the complainant. It is the specific contention of the OP that since the complaint is filed as against OP and this OP is not at all rendered any service to the complainant. Wherein the annexure document no.3 clearly mentions that the transportation of goods was handed over to one company by name M/s Preeti Home Packers and Movers. This OP from whom service is availed by complainant is not at all been made as a party in the complainant. This complaint is filed as against Shift Freight Solutions and Technologies Pvt. Ltd., having its branch office at Bengaluru and Head office at Nodia. When such being the position  of the complainant, the OP contended that as the  company who has rendered the service to the complainant, when they are not at all being made necessary and proper party in the complaint. The complaint suffers from the technical defects and the complaint will have to be dismissed for mis-joinder of OP and also for non-joinder of necessary and proper party in the complaint. By way of this complainant is trying to sue the OP who is not at all the necessary and proper party in the transaction between the parties. There is a contradiction in the contention in complaint, it is crystal clear from the facts of the complaint, it is clear from the conduct of the complaint that the complainant has  not approach this Commission with clean hands. The burden of proofof  the deficiency and deficient service always lies on the complainant. In the absence of any evidence and for want of documents in support of the contention of the complainant, the complaint deserves to be dismissed as it is not maintainable.Accordingly, the Point No.1 we answer in Negative.

10. POINT NO.2:-In view of the finding given in point no.1, point no.2 does not arise for consideration.

11. POINT NO.3: In the result, we passed the following:

                             ORDER

1. Complaint is hereby dismissed as it is not maintainable.
2. Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties. 

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Commission on 29^thMay 2023)

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

(NANDINI H KUMBHAR)          (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)       

 MEMBER                                  MEMBER

Witness examined on behalf of the complainant by way of affidavit:Sri Madhusudhan Reddy-who being the SPA holder of complainant

Documents produced by the complainant:

Witness examined on behalf of the OP by way of affidavit:Nil

Documents produced by the OP: Nil

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

(NANDINI H KUMBHAR)          (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)

         MEMBER                                     MEMBER

SKA*