CONSUMER PROTECTION COUNCIL vs SKY PAK COURIERS PVT.LTD

BOTH the appeals have arisen by a common judgment dated 8.10.91 given by the City District Forum, Ahmedabad ordering the Opponent to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as compensation and return of Rs. 500/- paid as charges and Rs. 1,000/- by way of cost. BOTH the complainant as well as the opponent have filed respective appeals.

THE short facts of the complaint are that the complainant who is a registered voluntary consumer association has filed the complaint on behalf of one Mr. Dinkarbhai Vadilal Trivedi, Proprietor of New Order Book Company, dealer and distributor of new and antiquarian and importer, exporter and publisher of books. THEre was a big fair at Frankfurt (West Germany). THE opponent is carrying its business as international couriers. THE complainant wanted to send some important pamphlet to the book fair which was scheduled to be held from 8.10.87 to 12.10.87 and, therefore, gave a packet to the opponent - the international courier on 7.10.87 and alleged to have paid Rs. 500/- as charges. According to the complainant the parcel was promised to be delivered within 2 days so that the same can be utilised for securing business by the complainant. It is not disputed that the parcel was delivered at Frankfurt on 12.10.87 at about 1.45 p.m. at the fag end of the fair and the complainant could not utilise those pamphlets for securing his book business etc. After coming back to India on 16.10.87 he served a notice and thereafter has filed this complaint. Before the City District Forum both sides have given oral and documentary evidence at length and it appears that the Forum has considered both oral and documentary evidence. The District Forum has come to the conclusion that the complainant has paid Rs. 500/- as courier charges. That the complainant has demanded the damages of Rs. 25,000/- but the District Forum has found Rs. 5,000/- as reasonable compensation and passed the order to that effect. Since the courier has not delivered the parcel in time as alleged to have been orally agreed by the Counsel. The District Forum has also passed an order for return of Rs. 500/-.

Mr. S.P. Sen, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sky Pak Couriers vehemently urged that the findings of the learned District Forum regarding return of Rs. 500/- recovered as charges is not in accordance with law and the document relied upon was not properly proved. We do not find any merits in this submission particularly when it was not suggested that the parcel was to be carried gratuitously and Mr. Sen could not show us what charges he has collected from the complainant by producing his account Books or any other documentary evidence and, therefore, there is no reason as to why the findings of the District Forum which are based upon oral and documentary evidence cannot be accepted. Mr. Sen thereafter argued that there was no guarantee that the parcel will be delivered within 2 days. We are not impressed by the argument for the simple reason that when most of the international couriers are guaranteeing the delivery within 24 hours and that is why they are charging Rs. 500/- for 600/- gms. of packet which is more than the charges levied by the post office.

IT is no doubt true that the receipt does not specify the time within which the parcel will be delivered. But it has been commercially accepted that such parcels are to be delivered within 24 hours or at the most within 2 days otherwise no consumer will pay Rs. 500/- for such a small parcel. In any case the parcel was to be sent to the fairat Frankfurt which was organised from 8.10.87 to 12.10.87. Therefore if there is no guarantee that the same will reach within two days the complainant would not have dispatched the same through the opponent and paid Rs. 500/-. Therefore the District Forum has accepted the evidence of the complainant and has come to the conclusion that the parcel was to be delivered within two days. We do not find any fault with the findings of the District Forum. We are also of the opinion that the reasoning given by the District Forum is very logical and the inference drawn is the only inference to be drawn from the dealing of the parties. As a matter of fact, the parcel reached Frankfurt on 12.10.87 at 1.45 p.m. (local time) and, for the purpose of augmenting the sale of antiquarian books for which he wanted these pamphlets to be delivered within two days. On account of non-delivery of the parcel, even though such a high amount has been recovered as charges, it is normal and natural that the consumer must have suffered heavy damages. In some circumstances the damages cannot be proved in terms of exact amount. The Court has therefore to estimate the same. The decision of the District Forum is based upon such estimate after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and Mr. Sen could not show as to how a small sum of Rs. 5,000/- can be said to be on a very high side. According to our opinion it was possible to estimate a higher amount but since the District Forum has assessed the amount at Rs. 5,000/- and we have not found any reason even from the arguments of Mr. Shah to interfere in the decision of ihe District Forum, we are not inclined to interfere in that decision. In any case Mr. Sen could not convince us that the damage was on higher side except to point out that in a notice the complainant had demanded only Rs. 500/-. The complainant not assisted by proper legal adviser may not be able to put up his case very properly. In any case even that offer has not been accepted by the other side. They did not care to give even the reply. Therefore the contents of the said notice was not binding to the complainant. That was mere offer without prejudice to his rights. We are, therefore, not inclined to interfere with the findings of the District Forum. So far the appeal filed by Mr. Shah is concerned, Mr. Shah argued at length that the complainant has suffered much more damages than Rs. 25,000/- but his client has restricted the claim to Rs. 25,000/- only. As we have stated earlier there is no specific evidence adduced by Mr. Shah to show that he has actually suffered Rs. 25,000/-as damages. The damage shall have therefore to be estimated. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the District Forum has already estimated the damages at Rs. 5,000/-. Mr. Sen is not able to convince us pointing out any fallacy in determining the amount by the District Forum. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the amount assessed by the District Forum shall have to be accepted.

IN the facts and circumstances stated above, we find no merits in any of the appeal Both the appeals shall have to be dismissed. ORDER Both the appeals are dismissed. Since both the parties have gained and lost, we do not pass any order regarding cost. Each party will bear its own cost. If any amount has been deposited by Sky Pak Limited before the District Forum, the District Forum shall pay the said amount to the complainant after 4 weeks from today. If the amount is not deposited, the same shall be deposited within a period of four weeks from the receipt of the order. Appeals dismissed.