MODERN AUTOMOBILES Vs. HARI MOHAN SWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by the opposite party, is directed against the order dated 5.2.1992, passed by the District Forum, Mysore, in complaint No. CPA/ 646/90-91, directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.3,745/- to the complainant with interest thereon. The facts, briefly stated, are as follows: 1. The complainant travelled from Bangalore to Mysore in the Super Deluxe Bus of the O. P. on 7.11.1990. He had taken the ticket for his travel, as per Ex. P-2 and for the luggage ticket, as per Ex. P-3. The complainant further averred that the driver of the said bus put the said luggage in the dicky of the bus. The bus on the way to Mysore, halted at Maddur. At Maddur it was found that the shutters of the dicky of the bus were kept open. The driver stood there discussing with the driver of the other bus which had come there just then. Thereafter the bus reached Mysore and it was found that the luggage of the complainant was found missing. The complainant further averred that he had purchased certain articles, as per bill Ex. P-l, at Bangalore, for his shop which he had kept in dicky of the bus, as per luggage ticket, Ex. P-3, which was found missing at Mysore. The complainant nextly averred that the driver of the bus on demand at Mysore did not give any proper explanation and so he immediately made a complaint of this occurrence to the Divisional Controller, at Mysore, as per Ex. P-4 and demanded the value of the luggage articles in a sum of Rs.3,745/- from the opposite party. When he did not receive any response from the opposite party, filed the complaint seeking the necessary relief.

(2.) The opposite party filed its version, admitted the fact that the complainant had made a complaint, as per Ex. P-4. It further averred that on enquiry the driver of the bus told that the passengers had taken away their luggage at Mysore. It nextly averred that they were holding further enquiry in this regard and would intimate the result of enquiry.

(3.) During enquiry the complainant examined himself and got Ext. P-1 to P-4, marked in evidence. The driver of the opposite party, has examined himself as R. W.1. The District Forum, on consideration of this material, held that the O. P. committed deficiency of service and in that view awarded compensation to the complainant in a sum of Rs.3,745/- the value of the articles as per Ex. P-1.