Daijiworld Media Network - Bengaluru (SP)

Bengaluru, Sep 27: A consumer’s court here has imposed penalty of four lac rupees on packers and movers agency for negligence in transporting the sedan car belonging to the head of a private concern. The court also observed that the agency had not only damaged the car when transporting it but also refused to pay cost of repairing the damage. The agency has been ordered to pay four lac rupees directly to the aggrieved person along with interest.

Seemanth Dutta, vice president of an information technology firm having its office near Anekal, had hired Agarwal Packers and Movers to transport his sedan car from his native place in Assam to his residence in the city during October, 2015. The agency took over the responsibility of safe transportation of the said car and charged him Rs 43,670.

The company was to hand over the car to the complainant Seemanth Kumar Singh, on October 26. But the car did not come, nor was any information available about its fate. After failing to locate the movement of the car on the company website, Singh went to the agency's office on Lalbaug Road and consulted the staff there. The employees gave him evasive replies and sent him off with the promise to deliver the car soon.

The car was finally handed over to Singh on November 6 at the car service station at Domlur here. Singh could guess that the car was misused during transportation. Records showed that it had travelled 150 km after the car was taken over by the agency, inside of the car had become wet, battery had gone dry and some parts had apparent signs of damage.

Singh approached a mechanic who estimated repair cost of Rs 3.7 lac. But the agency refused to pay any repair charges. They behaved as if they have nothing do with the damage to the car. Seemth then filed case in the first additional district consumers grievances redressal forum (consumers court) on January 27, 2016.

The agency lawyers tried to accuse Seemth of being driven by malicious intentions. The advocate said that the plea was fit to be dismissed. The court disagreed with these arguments and found that the agency had failed to provide convincing reply as to how the interiors of the car had become wet. It concluded that there was deficiency of service on the part of the agency and that it had caused financial loss to the complainant.

The consumer’s court accordingly ordered payment of Rs 3.3 lac towards repair of the car, Rs 50,000 penalty for causing mental distress, Rs 20,000 for causing problems and Rs 10,000 towards court costs. The court also ordered the above sum to be paid along with interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum.