| First Appeal No. FA/662/2013 | | (Arisen out of Order Dated 31/08/2012 in Case No. CC/258/2011 of District North 24 Parganas DF, Barasat) |
| | | | 1. DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd. | | DTDC Bhavan, Raghunathpur, VIP Road, Kolkata - 700 059, represented by its Law Officer Smt. Sabarna Sen Gupta. | | 2. Mr. Subhasis Chakraborty, Chairman & Managing Director, DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd. | | DTDC House, 3, Victoria Road, Bangalore - 560 047. | | 3. Mr. Suresh Kumar Bansal, Director, DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd. | | DTDC House, 3, Victoria Road, Bangalore - 560 047. | | 4. Tapashi Chakraborty, Director, DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd. | | DTDC House, 3, Victoria Road, Bangalore - 560 047. | | 5. Arpita Chakraborty Mitra, Director, DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd. | | DTDC House, 3, Victoria Road, Bangalore - 560 047. | | 6. Mr. Abhishek Chakraborty, Director, DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd. | | DTDC House, 3, Victoria Road, Bangalore - 560 047. |
| ...........Appellant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. M/s. Future Value Retail Ltd. | | Block-BG, Plot No.5, New Town, Action Area 1B, Kolkata - 700 056. |
| ...........Respondent(s) |
|
|
| ORDER | 28/11/14 HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. KALIDAS MUKHERJEE, PRESIDENT This Appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by Learned District Forum, Barasat, North 24-Paraganas in case no.258 of 2011 allowing the complaint with certain directions upon the OPs. The facts of the case, in short, are that the Complainant Company on 16/02/11 dispatched packages containing valuable business documents which did not reach the consignee. For the non-delivery of the articles the complaint was lodged. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that the article was lost in transit and could not be traced, but the claim was imaginary. It is contended that it was a commercial transaction and the Complainant Company cannot claim itself to be a consumer. It is also submitted that the consignment was not insured. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that the Complainant sent e-mail to the OP and the OP admitted that the documents were lost and the Learned District Forum was justified in passing the impugned judgment and order. We have heard the submission made by both sides. Admittedly, the Complainant is a Company and the transaction in question was commercial one. It is the settled principle of law that a Private Limited Company cannot maintain a consumer complaint. The Complainant, therefore, cannot be said to be a consumer. The Learned District Forum was not justified in allowing the complaint. The Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is set aside. The petition of complaint is dismissed. | |
