NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2094/2010

INLAND ROAD TRANSPORT PVT. LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

GIRI FISH CANNING COMPANY & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. ANIL GOEL

04 Aug 2010

ORDER


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. 2094 OF 2010
(Against the Order dated 06/11/2009 in Appeal No. 619/2009 of the State Commission Karnataka)
1. INLAND ROAD TRANSPORT PVT. LTD.Through its Authorized Representative Sh. B.K. Nayak, Having Its Head Office at, 221/2, Strand Bank RoadKolkatta - 700001West Bengal ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. GIRI FISH CANNING COMPANY & ANR.Through its Proprietor S. Prabhakar B. Naik, Resident of Waman Ashrama Road, Taluka: Karwar, Sadashivgada, Malaji Road, Taluka Karwar2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDKittle College RoadDharwad - 580001 ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI ,MEMBER
For the Petitioner :Mr. Ashwani Goel & Mr. Rajeev Kumar, ADv. for MR. ANIL GOEL, Advocate
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 04 Aug 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

          Respondent/complainant sent a consignment of 825 carton boxes containing 14,850 kg of fish worth Rs.5,04,900/- to be delivered to Vinayaka Enterprises, Gowahati, Assam through petitioner.  According to the respondent, the goods were to be

-2-

delivered at Gowahati within 15 days from the date of booking which the petitioner failed to deliver.  The goods were sent on 12.12.2007 and the petitioner offered the delivery to the consignee on 31.12.2007 which the consignee refused to take on the ground that the goods had become rotten and damaged.  Respondent/complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum which was allowed.

          The petitioner was directed to refund the price of the goods, i.e., Rs.5,04,900/- to the respondent/complainant.  Rs.2,000/- were awarded by way of compensation and Rs.2,000/- as costs.

          Aggrieved by this, petitioner filed the appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

          We agree with the view taken by the fora below.  The goods sent by the consigner were perishable.  The goods were to be delivered within 15 days of the handing over which the petitioner failed to deliver.  There certainly is a deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner and the fora below have rightly directed the petitioner to compensate the respondent/complainant for the loss suffered by


-3-

him.  Dismissed.  No costs.

 



......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................VINEETA RAIMEMBER