RUPKALA vs INLAND COURIER (P) LTD.

THIS is a complaint under Section 17 read with Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

THE Complainant booked a parcel containing eleven sarees worth Rs. 50,000/- on 10-6-1992 with the Opposite Party Courier for transport and delivery to M/s. Vertical Shades, KC-8A, Ashoka Vihar, Delhi-110052 under receipt No. 25894 paying a charge of Rs. 280/. THE parcel was agreed to be sent by air. But the Opposite Party sent it by railway and it was lost in transit. THE missed parcel had not been traced or delivered to the Opposite Party. Hence the claim for value of the goods and for compensation in the sum of Rs. 1 lakh. THE Opposite Party admitted the booking of the Parcel under receipt No. 25894 and payment of a fee of Rs. 280/-. But it denied that the parcel contained eleven sarees worth Rs. 50,000/-. According to the Opposite Party, it contained only sample cloths of no commercial value. THEre was no agreement to send the parcel by air. THE Opposite Party sent the parcel through fast train courier by rail but was lost in transit. THE compensation claimed has no basis and is unsustainable. Exhibits A1 to A15 and B1 and B2 are Marked. Proof affidavits are also filed.

Admittedly the Complainant had sent a parcel through the Opposite Party Courier for transport to and delivery to M/s. Vertical Shades, New Delhi under Exhibit A(1)(a) Couriers receipt dated 10-6-1992. A sum of Rs. 280/- has been collected as charge by the Opposite Party. The consignment has not been delivered to the consignee. It has been lost in transit. According to the Complainant it was agreed to be sent by air and enhanced charge was collected therefore, but the Opposite Party has sent it through railway. Whatever it may be the consignment has been lost and the Courier Opposite Party is liable to pay damages to the Complainant as there has been gross deficiency of service and negligence.

IT is the case of the Complainant that the parcel contained eleven sarees covered by Exhibit A1 bill dated 10-6-1992. Under this bill, the cost of eleven sarees comes to Rs. 45,188/-. The case of the Opposite Party that the parcel was said to contain only sample cloth of no commercial value cannot be accepted. In the face of Exhibit A1 bill and the affidavit of the Proprietor of Rupkala, we accept the case of the Complainant and held that the parcel contained eleven sarees worth Rs. 45,188/- and the Complainant is entitled to get the amount from the Opposite Party. The Complainant has also claimed compensation in the sum of Rs. 1 lakh. This is excessive and exorbitant. A sum of Rs. 5,000/- will be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. In all the Complainant is entitled to Rs. 50,188/-. In the result, we order as follows : (1) The Opposite Party shall pay to the Complainant the sum of Rs. 50,188/- with subsequent interest at 12% per annum within one month from the date of this order. (2) The Opposite Party shall also pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as costs. Complaint allowed with costs.