2 hrs ago
Delhi Consumer Commission Orders Movers to Pay Rs 50,000
Rajnish Kumar Ahuja hired a company to move his belongings.
He said the box holding his TV fell while workers were packing.
He also said his shoe rack was damaged.
He showed the commission a delivery note, photographs and other documents.
The company disputed his claim and argued that it was not responsible for the TV damage.
The commission noted that the company’s records listed the TV’s value as Rs 30,000.
It found the evidence supporting Ahuja’s complaint had not been rebutted.
The commission did not accept his separate claim that the delivery was late.
It ordered the company to pay Rs 50,000 for the damaged TV and shoe rack, including litigation costs.
Rajnish Kumar Ahuja paid Rs 18,050 to move household goods from Naraina Vihar to Gurgaon.
He said the TV box fell during packing and that the TV screen and shoe rack were damaged.
The commission relied on the delivery note, photographs and other documents, which it said the company had not rebutted.
It rejected the company’s argument that the TV had not been valued, noting its records listed the TV at Rs 30,000.
The commission ordered the company to pay Rs 50,000 for the damaged items, inclusive of litigation costs.
- Who
- Rajnish Kumar Ahuja and an unnamed packers and movers company.
- What
- A consumer commission ordered the company to pay Rs 50,000 for damage to a TV and shoe rack.
- Where
- The goods were moved from Naraina Vihar, Delhi, to Gurgaon; the case was heard by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South-West Delhi.
- When
- The order was issued on September 16; the packing began on October 16, 2023, and delivery was the following day.
- Why
- The commission found Ahuja’s evidence of damage during packing and unpacking unrebutted and held the company deficient in service.
Consumer’s position
Company’s position
Responsibility for TV damage
Consumer’s position
Ahuja said the TV was working before packing and its box fell while employees were making space for it; he provided a delivery note and photographs.
Company’s position
The company initially closed the claim as “No Claim,” saying its scrutiny showed its employees had not damaged the TV.
TV valuation and liability
Consumer’s position
Ahuja sought compensation for the damage and pursued a consumer complaint after rejecting the company’s offers.
Company’s position
The company argued that the TV had not been declared or valued and that its liability was restricted under the Carriage by Road Act. The commission noted that company records listed the TV at Rs 30,000.
Alleged delivery delay
Consumer’s position
Ahuja alleged that delivery had been promised for October 16 and that delay caused inconvenience.
Company’s position
The commission found no record of that allegation in the delivery acknowledgement, emails or National Consumer Helpline complaint, and did not rely on it.
Key facts
- Moving charge
- Rs 18,050
- TV value recorded by company
- Rs 30,000
- Initial TV repair estimate
- Rs 29,618
- Exchange model offered by Sony service centre
- Rs 44,788
- Company offers reported
- Rs 10,000 initially, followed by Rs 15,000 through a legal department letter dated February 6, 2024
- Compensation ordered
- Rs 50,000 for the damaged TV and shoe rack, inclusive of litigation costs
- Separate delay claim
- Rejected because the commission found no mention of the alleged delay in the cited records
Quotes
South-West Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The consumer commission hearing Ahuja’s complaint.
“We have no reason to disbelieve the complainant’s averments”
indianexpress.com
Sources
Related news
Puducherry Commission Orders Movers to Pay Rs 73,000
Delhi Commission Orders Packers and Movers to Pay ₹50,000
Kerala Commission Orders TV Replacement, Rs 25,000 Compensation
Mumbai Commission Upholds ₹66.53 Lakh Diamond Shipment Compensation Order
Hyderabad Consumer Commission Orders Insurer to Pay Rs 5.60 Lakh
Ordered Diapers Lead to Compensation After Delivery Failure
Amazon Diwali Sale Highlights Five Wireless Home Theatre Systems
Ten Wireless Headphones for Travel, Focus and Everyday Listening
Dedicated Music Players Return as Listeners Resist Streaming
Sennheiser Momentum True Wireless 5 Review: Strong Sound, Premium Price
