Judgment:
(This appeal coming before us for final hearing on 01.07.2011 and on hearing the arguments of both sides and upon perusing the material records, this Commission made the following Order :)
ORDER
J. JAYARAM, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. The unsuccessful opposite parties 1 to 4 in the complaint are the appellants herein.
2. The opposite parties have filed this appeal against the order of the District Forum, Udagamandalam in COP No.31/2003 dated 22.08.2007 directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.6,185/- towards the value of garments lost and a sum of Rs.2,000/- for mental agony and sufferings with costs of Rs.500/-, on account of the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in not delivering the goods booked by the complainant.
3. The case of the complainant is that on 4.12.2001 the complainant sent a parcel containing garments valued at Rs.6,185/- through the 1st opposite party for safe carriage and delivery to the consignee, but the parcel was not delivered to the consignee and hence the complaint claiming Rs.6,185/- towards the value of goods and a sum of Rs.5,000/- for mental agony, suffering and loss of reputation in business, with costs.
4. According to the opposite parties, the complainant sent a cover through the 1st opposite party and the cover was duly forwarded by the 1st opposite party and the same was delivered to the complainants party at Kotayam.
5. The District Forum considering the rival contentions held that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and passed an order directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.6,185/- towards the value of garments lost which were sent through the 1st opposite party and to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- for mental agony and sufferings and costs of Rs.500/-. Aggrieved by this order the opposite parties have preferred this appeal.
6. The contention of the appellants/opposite parties is that the cover sent by the complainant/respondent has been delivered to the addressee/consignee, whereas the contention of the respondent/complainant is that the cover has not been delivered to the addressee/consignee. We have to note that no proof of delivery is filed by the appellants/ opposite parties before the Forum to establish that the consignment has been delivered to addressee/consignee. Therefore there is nothing on record to show the cover/parcel was delivered to the addressee/consignee. Therefore there is deficiency in service on the part of the appellants/opposite parties in not delivering the articles to the addressee/consignee.
7. The further contention of the appellants would be that there is nothing on record to show that the parcel contained garments to the value of Rs.6,185/- and that only a sum of Rs.25/- was collected from the complainant/respondent for safe carriage and delivery of the parcel and further the respondent/complainant did not declare the value of the articles sent by parcel and that as per the terms and conditions for loss of goods a sum of Rs.100/- only is payable to the consignor in case of loss of articles.8. It is pertinent to note that no proof of delivery of the articles to the consignee is filed by the appellants/opposite parties and so the presumption is that the articles sent by the respondent/complainant has not been delivered to the addressee/consignee. Further we have to note that as per Exhibit A1, the respondent/complainant has purchased the articles for Rs.6,185/- from one Mohans Store, Ooty. Therefore we come to note that the respondent/complainant purchased the articles for Rs.6,185/- vide Exhibit A1 and have sent the articles through the 1st opposite party to be delivered at Kottayam and that the parcel containing the articles have not been delivered at the other end. Therefore the deficiency in service on the part of the appellants/opposite parties is clearly established by the respondent/complainant. The other contentions raised by the appellants/opposite parties do not merit acceptance.
9. The District Forum has rightly held that there is deficiency in service on the part of the appellants/opposite parties and has passed an order directing the appellants/ opposite parties to pay to the respondent/complainant a sum of Rs.6,185/- being the cost of the articles sent by the respondent/complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards mental agony and sufferings and a sum of Rs.500/- towards costs. We agree with the finding and the decision of the District Forum.
10. In the result, the appeal is dismissed, confirming the order of the District Forum. No order as to costs in the appeal.