1. -AGGRIEVED by the Order dated 21. 2. 2008 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi the complainant has filed his revision petition awarding compensation for the mental agony, harassment and loss suffered by the complainant to the tune of Rs. 25,000 besides Rs. 5,000 as costs of litigation, the complainant has filed this Revision Petition before us.
2. THE factual matrix of this case in short is that the complainant Sunil Chawla availed the courier services of World Pack Air Courier Service (I) Pvt. Ltd. which is respondent before us by sending four packets of pharmaceutical products from 17. 7. 1997 to 3. 10. 1997. As the respondent had failed to deliver the packets the complainant filed complaint before the District Forum. The District Forum allowed the complaint vide its Order dated 23. 11. 2002 and directed the courier service to pay Rs. 49,531 being the price of the medicines contained in the packets with Rs. 5,000 as damages. Dissatisfied by the Order of the District Forum the courier company has filed an appeal before the Delhi State Commission. The State Commission after hearing the parties passed an Order as stated above.
It is clear from the records of the case that the courier company failed to produce any documentary evidence to show that the packets were delivered to the consignee. At the same time it is clear that the packets were not insured by the complainant. The terms of the contract does not stipulate that in the event of loss the courier company has to make good the price of the goods which were lost in transit.
In EMS Speed Post by the Postal Department, the contract stipulates that in case loss, damage or delay to the articles sent by the speed post liability of the Postal Department is limited to twice the amount charged by the Department of Posts towards speed post charges. Some private courier companies also have a similar condition printed behind receipt given by them to the dispatcher. In this case the contract between the parties does not stipulate a condition that the courier company would be liable to reimburse the price of the goods sent by the dispatcher in case of loss, delay or damage. Hence we cannot award the price of the goods as compensation to the complainant/dispatcher of goods.
3. OUR view is fortified by the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India in Bharati Knitting Company v. DHL Worldwide Express Courier Division of Airfreight Ltd. , II (1996) CPJ 25 (SC ). In this case, it was held that: "we are of the opinion that the National Commission was right in limiting the liability undertaken in the contract entered into by the parties and in awarding the amount for deficiency in service to the extent of the liability undertaken by the respondent. Therefore, we do not think that there is any illegality in the order passed by the Commission. "
However, the State Commission has been generous in awarding Rs. 25,000 as compensation and Rs. 5,000 as costs. We do not deem it appropriate to interfere with the order passed by the State Commission. Hence the Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no orders as to costs. Revision Petition dismissed.
