Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
โ€”

Rana M. Arshad Aasi vs Abdul Saboor

CourtDistrict Consumer Court
Case No.Case No. 2255/11
Date2011-10-13
Judge(s)Ch. Mahmood Ahmed Shakir Jajja
ResultN/A

1. The version of the complainant is that he purchased a Plot No. 83 in Four Seasons Housing Scheme, Faisalabad for his daughter on installments; that the installments were to be paid after three months; that he sent a cheque on 13-05-2011 through B.C.S under receipt No. 010080 for payment of said plot which was not delivered in time while the respondent had promised to deliver the same within 24 hours; that the petitioner has faced mental torture and financial loss due to his faulty service; that he will have to pay additional dues due to late payment; that the petitioner has claimed Rs.20,000/- as compensation and Rs.15,000/- as additional payment total Rs. 35,000/-; that the complainant issued legal notice to the respondent on 31-05-2011. The respondent received legal notice but did not respond which shows his malafide. Hence, this complaint.

2. Contrary to it, the version of the respondent is that a packet was booked for Faisalabad under receipt No. 010080 on 13-05-2011; that all courier companies provide services within the city but the said packet was to be delivered out of city (Faisalabad). So, the same received back due to being out of service area; that the staff of B.C.S Faisalabad tried to contact telephonically but the addressee did not attend the call; that the respondent booked the packet through TCS by paying Rs. 260/- from his on pocket but it was also not delivered due to being out of service area; that when the petitioner- Rana Muhammad Arshad Aasi came to me for the said packet, he was similarly informed that through TCS, the delivery is impossible; that the respondent is running a new company and earns only Rs. 7,000/- per month; He is not responsible for non delivery of the packet.

3. The complainant, to substantiate his version, has placed on record photo copy of the agreement for purchase of plot Mark-A. The map of the housing scheme Mark-B. Photo copy of BCS receipt Mark-C. Photo copy of the legal notice Mark-D. Photo copy of the receipt Mark-E and original Acknowledgment Due Card Exp-1-A. Copy of the check Mark-G. A letter issued by the Four Seasons housing scheme Ex-P1. Copy of the receipt of ICS courier service Ex-P2. Copy of the receipt issued by the said housing scheme Ex- Copy of the cheque No. 6904162 Mark-H. Copy of the leopards courier service Ex- Copy of the cheque No.6904164 Mark-I. Copy of the original receipt issued by the said housing scheme Ex-P5. Copy of the receipt BCS Ex-P6. Photo copy of the cheque No.6904166 Mark-J. Copy of the receipt issued by the said housing scheme Ex-P7.

4. All these documents make out that the complainant has purchased a plot in the Four Seasons housing scheme in Faisalabad in the name of his daughter Assra Urooj for which he has been paying regular installments through cheques. He admittedly dispatched the disputed cheque on 13-05-2011 vide receipt No. 010080 through BCS courier service but it did not reached the destination till 30-05-2011. Whereas, the last date for the payment of installment was 29-05-2011.

5. The complainant had to pay surcharges of Rs.3516.54 for the month of March, April and May 2011.

6. Although the version of the respondent is that the BCS packet was to be delivered at the address which is out of boundaries of Faisalabad City for which no courier service is available and he has paid Rs.260/- from his on pocket for returning the said packet through TCS service but it could not be delivered due to non availability of service at the given address and non attendance of phone by the office of Four Seasons housing scheme. Anyhow, it is admitted that the packet under consideration could not be delivered by the respondent in time. If there was no service at the delivery point, the respondent should have not took the responsibility of delivery of the same. So that, the complainant might be able to send the cheque / payment through other means. It has been proved without any shadow of doubt that the respondent has provided faulty services to the complainant. The complainant is therefore, held entitled in the terms of Rs. 35, 000/- as damages for compensation of mental torture and wastage of time suffered by the complainant. The complaint is therefore allowed in favour of the complainant and against the respondent. File be put up for execution of the order on 16-11-2011.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch