Skip to main content

Law student wins case against courier company

Chanakya Sharma, (21), a student of National Law University in Lucknow,  contested for a year against an errant courier company in the consumer court in Ahmedabad and won on July 1.

This case has set two precedents the court adjudged that the courier company's liability printed on its receipt, which says that in case of any loss or damage the company shall not pay more than Rs 100, is against the public policy and ordered the company to pay a compensation of Rs 7, 000. Secondly, court admitted the case in Ahmedabad, where cause of action arose rather than the prevalent norm of accepting a case at the place of contract. The place of contract in this case was Jaipur.

Sharma, a resident of Jaipur hired the services of Overnite Express Ltd in Jaipur to send his project report titled Critical thinking and legal reasoning' on a condition of dropping it in the Nirma University, Ahmedabad on March 7, 2014. However, his project reached 7 days later causing him the loss of 15 marks on his project work.

"During the seven days, I called the courier service in Jaipur and Ahmedabad for 4-5 times a day but they didn't give me the exact status of my academic papers," said Sharma, who is presently doing his internship with State Commission for Consumer Dispute Redressal, Jaipur.

Finally, he filed a case at the consumer redressal forum in Ahmedabad intending to test consumers rights enshrined in the law. He filed a token compensation of Rs 10,000 only to cover up the expenses of his litigation.

He demolished the courier company's main argument which said that Ahmedabad court do not have jurisdiction to hear this case. "Though it was Jaipur where contract was signed but it was Ahmedabad where the cause of action arose," argued by the Sharma. He also presented case laws stating that private entities cannot impose upon ordinary citizens its conditions which are opposed to the public policy.

"I truly believe that there is an urgent need of spreading awareness about consumer rights. And after the long battle of more than a year, I believe that we can create a society where even an average consumer who is away from litigation acrobatics can get justice by the judicial mechanism present in the country," said Sharma.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/City/Jaipur/Law-student-wins-case-against-courier-company/articleshow/48046925.cms

Comments

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t

Vanishing promoters and languishing shareholders

Over Rs 60,000 crore of shareholders’ wealth is stuck in 1,450 companies suspended by the stock exchanges. More importantly, near 100 per cent pledging of promoter holding appears to be common in many of these companies. This, almost rules out any chance of the companies bouncing back. The suspension is for non-compliance of the listing norms. Vanishing Companies - Definition As per the definition stipulated by SEBI, any listed company, which raised moneythrough initial public offer and, thereafter, stopped operations, did not file returnseither with the RoC or SEBI and did not exist on the registered premises wastermed as vanishing.There are provisions under Companies Act under which companies are termedvanishing companies on satisfying certain conditions. it is provided a companywould be deemed to be a vanishing company, if it satisfies all the conditions given below : a) Failed to file returns with Registrar of Companies (ROC) for a period of two years; b) Failed to fil