TCS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs Mst — 2022 PLD 524 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

TCS (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS Mst. HASEENA BEGUM Ss. 13 & 2(c)(iii)---Liability for faulty or defective services---Consumer---Scope---Respondent filed a claim pleading therein that she obtained courier services of appellant for purposes of delivering admission forms of her son to a medical college---Courier was delivered by the appellant at another medical college, which was later on traced and delivered to the correct addressee but not before expiry of admission phase---Consumer Court awarded damages to the appellant---Contention as to the respondent falling out of the categories of permissible claimant(s) being not directly affected from the service as the claimant was not the one who actually lost admission due to purported faulty service, was not inspiring---Both the hirer who paid consideration for the services and beneficiary of such service were covered within the definition of the consumer as provided in S. 2(c)(ii) of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005---Definition was comprehensive enough to include the one who hired the service for consideration and at the same time in view of the broad definition even other beneficiaries could not be denied the action, provided the same was brought due to damage caused by any faulty service and it was not permissible for a service provider to take a position that there was no privity of contract---Respondent being direct hirer and her son being another beneficiary could have maintained the claim, subject to fulfilment of remaining conditions---Objection of the appellant was turned down. Ss. 13 & 15---Liability for faulty or defective services---Restriction on grant of damages---Scope---Respondent filed a claim pleading therein that she obtained courier services of appellant for purposes of delivering admission form of her son to a medical college---Courier was delivered by the appellant at another medical college, which was later on traced and delivered to the correct addressee but not before expiry of admission phase---Consumer Court awarded damages to the appellant---Contention of appellant was that under S. 15 of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005, service provider's responsibility was limited to return of consideration---Validity---Service provider's responsibility was limited to return of consideration or a part thereof and costs in addition thereto, when no damage was suffered by consumer, however where the faulty service had caused damage to the consumer, the restriction in the section did not apply---Examination of Ss.15 & 13 as well as its surrounding provisions reflected that a consumer who had suffered a damage and had met the criteria that the claimed damages had proximate relationship with the faulty service was entitled to seek damages---Objection of appellant was turned down. S. 13---Liability for faulty or defective services---Scope---Word "proximity" is normally used as a convenient label to describe a relationship between the parties by virtue of which the defendant can reasonably forsee that his act or omission is liable to cause damage to the claimant. Preamble---Scope---Preamble of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005, reflects that the legislature has promulgated the Act for protecting interest of the consumers, to promote their rights and to provide speedy remedy for the redressing of their complaints---To achieve the purpose wide range of powers are given to the authority and forum of counsel for consumers in Part-IV of the Act---At the same time, duties have been imposed upon service provider including the duty to give proper disclosure in terms of S. 16 of the Act---Restrictions are imposed from making any false, deceptive or misleading statement by way of Part-V of the Act---Detailed reading of the Act in the light of the Preamble as well as the long title reflects that the legislation is beneficial in the sense that it tends to protect public from exploitation and the acts of individuals by imposing obligations, with whom they stand in relationship of customer---Legislation is required to be construed in correct perspective to fructify the legislative intent underlying the enactment and its beneficial provisions are to be interpreted liberally to extend the benefit upon whom it is conferred by the legislature. S. 13---Liability for faulty or defective services---Scope---Word "proximate" used in S. 13 of Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005, has been used to describe not only the relationship between the parties, but the connection between service provider's negligence or faulty service and the customer's damage. S. 13---Liability for faulty or defective services---Scope---Respondent filed a claim pleading therein that she obtained courier services of appellant for purposes of delivering admission form of her son to a medical college---Courier was delivered by the appellant at another medical college, which was later on traced and delivered to the correct addressee but not before expiry of admission phase---Consumer Court awarded damages to the appellant---Validity---Respondent in her claim had complained about the purported faulty courier services and neglect of responsibility of delivering the consignment by specific date at a particular address---Though the liability as well as damage done to the respondent was denied but throughout the trial, nothing was brought on record to show that how fault at the part of the appellant had not caused the damage for which the compensatory award was granted to the respondent by the Consumer Court---Losses capable of calculation with reasonable certainty being special damages could only be allowed when not just explicitly pleaded but proof of each item of such claimed losses was given with reference to the evidence on record, whereas inexact losses like pain, suffering etc. could be compensated as general damages, which could be assessed by the Court in its discretion, required to be exercised according to the facts and circumstances of each case---Award of certain amount of damages in addition to return of charges of disputed shipment, costs and loss of amount deposited in Bank allowed by Consumer Court was reasonable compensation---Appeals were dismissed. S. 31---Order of Consumer Court---Scope---Remedies detailed in S.31 of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005, can be granted in addition to each other and in appropriate cases more than one direction or remedy can be granted---Not merely the harm or mental pain, agony, discomfort, losses suffered by individual customer but it is quality of the services and conduct of its provider upon which concentration is also required in the cases of established negligence---To achieve required standards and quality service the Consumer Courts are also empowered to issue direction of ceasing to provide faulty service, for the welfare of the consumers, until the service provider achieves the required standards. General damages---Scope---Failure to quantify damages does not mean that a claimant is not entitled to general damages under the rule of thumb when sufficient material is brought on record. S. 31---Order of Consumer Court---Scope---Legislature, while giving substitute system of consumer justice by way of speedy trial, required to be concluded within six months, provides extensive range of remedies starting from damages, compensatory awards, costs, recovery of prices for individual sufferer, at the same time aims to bring about a quality improvement in the approach of the service provider and services through the Act.

TCS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs Mst — 2022 PLD 524 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLD