Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

M/S D.T.D.C. Courier Limited vs Sh. Jawahar Shelly And Another on 21 August, 2006

  
	 
	 STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARANCHAL
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 

	
	 

 

	
	 

 

	
	 

-
	 2 -

 

STATE
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARANCHAL
 

DEHRA
DUN
 

 


 FIRST APPEAL
NO. 212 / 2005
 

 


 

M/s
D.T.D.C. Courier Limited
 

......Appellant
 

 


 

Versus
 

Sh.
Jawahar Shelly and another
 

.....Respondents
 

 


 

Sh.
Manoj Kohli, Learned Counsel for the Appellant
 

Respondent
No. 1 Present Himself
 

None
for Respondent No. 2
 

 


 Coram:
Hon'ble Justice Irshad Hussain, President
 

	
  Surendra Kumar,		    Member
 

	
  Ms. Luxmi Singh, 		    Member
 
 

Dated:
 21.08.2006
 

 ORDER

(Per:

Mr. Justice Irshad Hussain, President):
This is an appeal against the order dated 27.08.2005 passed by the District Forum, Tehri, Garhwal in Consumer Complaint No. 42 of 2004, Sh.. Jawahar Shelly Vs. Kirti Enterprises and another, directing the opposite parties to pay to the complainant Rs. 500/- towards commission charges for getting the duplicate bank draft prepared; Rs. 2,000/- towards telephone and other expenses; Rs. 150/- towards additional expenses for preparation of draft; Rs. 1,244/- towards other expenses; Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and suffering and Rs. 500/- as expenses of the litigation within the stipulated period.

2. We have heard the Learned Counsel for the appellant, courier service and the complainant in person. The only point raised by the Learned Counsel for the appellant is that the compensation for mental agony and suffering awarded by the District Forum is exorbitant and that no cogent reason has been given by the District Forum in awarding the said amount. No doubt, the bank draft sent through courier service got lost and the complainant had to run from pillar to post and have to obtain a duplicate bank draft of a value of more than Rs. 1,00,000/-, therefore, the incidental expenses awarded to the complainant appear just and sufficient but there can be no doubt that there was no occasion to award a higher amount of Rs. 5,000/- towards mental agony and suffering. This is also so in view of sufficient amount awarded under incidental expenses as referred above and considering this aspect of the matter, we are convinced that the appellant has made out a case for reduction of amount of the compensation awarded under the head - mental agony and suffering. In our considered view, the compensation of Rs. 2,500/- only under this head would have been reasonable and sufficient and, therefore, we propose to modify the order of the District Forum to that extent only.

3. In view of above, the appeal succeed partly and is to be allowed accordingly.

4. Appeal is partly allowed. Order dated 27.08.2005 of the District Forum is modified to the extent that the complainant shall be entitled to compensation of Rs. 2,500/- towards mental agony and suffering apart from other expenses and incidental charges awarded to the complainant by the District Forum per order dated 27.08.2005. Costs of the appeal made easy. The appellant shall pay all the amount to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.

(MS.

LUXMI SINGH) (SURENDRA KUMAR) (JUSTICE IRSHAD HUSSAIN)