Pafex told to pay Rs 5,000 by Consumer Court

Chandigarh, January 9

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I slapped a fine of Rs 5,000 on Pafex (Prakash Air Freight Private Limted) for its failure to deliver a parcel.

The district forum comprising president PD Goel and members Rajinder Singh Gill and Madanjit Kaur Sahota has also directed the respondents to pay Rs 2,195 on account of the loss suffered by the complainant.

The complainant, Dilpreet Singh, submitted that he approached Brijesh Sareen, Shiv Shakti Stationery and Couriers at Panjab University (Opposite party no 2) for sending a parcel containing some clothes and shoes to his cousin at Jhansi. He showed his parcel to the opposite party no.2, who asked him to pack it properly, which he did accordingly and gave it to the opposite party No.2. He said after three days, he received the packet and found that one pair of shoes, costing Rs 2,195, was missing from the packet. His cousin went to the office of opposite party No.1 at Jhansi, but it told him to contact their Chandigarh office, from the where the courier was booked. When he approached the opposite party no.2 and asked him about the parcel, he replied that it was done in a hurry. He made irrelevant excuses and asked the complainant to talk to branch manager of the opposite party No.1 in Chandigarh. It is averred that he called the branch manager, who told him to meet the opposite party No.2 who offered only Rs 500 as compensation.

The counsel for the opposite party No.1 pleaded that the transaction in question is without any declaration of goods in respect of the goods claim, hence the complainant cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong. It is further pleaded that courier had been duly delivered and no item of the couriered goods of the complainant had been lost. At the time of taking delivery of the impugned shipment, the consignee pointed out no irregularities and admittedly the delivery slip was signed in token of receipt and acceptance of the shipment in good order. Furthermore, as per the terms and conditions of the consignment note, the liability of the opposite party No.1, if any, is limited to Rs 100 only.

Initially, the opposite party no 2 appeared in person and sought time to file reply/evidence but subsequently, did not appear and suffered ex-parte.

The forum observed that the non-appearance of opposite party no.2 as well as non-filing of reply, despite appearing on three dates of hearing and then suffering ex-parte order, shows that opposite party no.2 did not want to say anything in its defense or to contest the claim of the complainant and the allegations made by the complainant are true.