PER MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK 1. Counsel for the parties present. Arguments heard at length. It is clear that Angelique International Ltd., the Complainant had sent the goods to be handed over to the Consignee Elina Garment Industries (P) Ltd., Kathmandu (Nepal) OP-3 (Performa Party). It was admitted that OP 3 had left the given address and its whereabouts were not known. The goods were sent through transporter Opposite Parties 1 & 2. The goods were to be delivered to the Opposite Party No.3 who had to purchase the same. 2. The main objection raised by the All India Transport Corpotation and Pashupati Road Carrier OPs-1 & 2 respectively is that they did not receive the documents from OP-3 and nobody approached them to retire the goods. 3. During the arguments, the counsel for the Complainant admits that Builti is with them. Builti was shown to this Commission and was given back. 4. As agreed by both the parties, it is hereby ordered that OP-1 & 2 need not deliver the goods to OP-3. They would return the goods to the complainant. The complainant will get the same back at Kathmandu on 02.01.2013 from 10 A.M. onwards. Both the parties are directed to prepare the list (inventory list), which must be signed by both the parties. It must be borne in mind that the same goods should be delivered to the Complainant. The OPs are not permitted to give the new clothes or different clothes. It is also made clear that OP-1 & 2 are not allowed to open the consignment itself that will be opened by the Complainant. The OP-1 & 2 are directed to produce the original consignment itself with markings etc. otherwise, it will be assumed that the fresh clothes are being delivered or nothing is being delivered. 5. It is also made clear that in case fresh clothes are delivered and in case the complainant accepts the same, it is well and good. If they do not like it or reject the same, the OP-1 & 2 will compensate it with a sum of Rs. 19,69,905/-. However, it has also brought to our notice that OP-1 & 2 had clearly informed the Complainant, vide letter dated 08.12.1997, that since the documents were not produced, therefore, they were unable to retire the goods to OP-3. Consequently, this fact came to the knowledge of the Complainant. Due to above said flaw delivery could not be made. So we direct that if no original goods are given back, OP- 1 &2 will pay the above said amount of Rs. 19,69,905/-. It is also made clear that Mr. Parveen Singhai, Assistant Manager, Angelique International Ltd. Will go to collect the goods and if some resistance is shown by the OPs, in that case, we give him liberty to seek the police aid. He is also permitted to take photographs of the consignment. 6. The order to this extent is passed with the consent of the parties. Now we advert to the question on the interest and costs of litigation. Complainant should have taken care from 08.12.1997 onwards. The consignment was sent in the month of January 1996 and the first information was sent by OP-1 & 2 after the expiry about 2 years on 08.12.1997. Consequently, the liability for that delay lies at the doors of the OP1 and OP2. Consequently, the Complainant is entitled to interest from January 1996 to November 1997 @ 6% p.a. No further interest with effect from 8/12/1997 onwards accures because after coming to know that documents were not being produced by the consignee or any person on his behalf, no fault can be attributed on the part of the OPs 1 and 2. 7. Counsel for the complainant does not claim the litigation charges. 8. This is admitted that the complainant has not yet received any payment from the Consignee. 9. The matter stands disposed of. If some problem arises the parties are given the liberty to place it before the Execution Court. | 
