Petitioner/complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum with the allegation that he is working as commission agent and opposite party M/s Sharma Goods Transport Company is in the business of transport.  Petitioner had sent 175 bags of mustard for transportation from West Bengal to M/s Ananta Milling Industries at Bainke Jhati Phadi, West Bengal.  Petitioner was to pay a sum of Rs.17,307/- as hire charges with the condition that Rs.4,000/- will be paid by the petitioner to M/s Sharma Goods Transport Company and

the balance amount will be paid on receipt of the goods at the destination.  The goods were not delivered at the destination to the consignee and on enquiry, it was informed by the transporter that the truck driver on the way had siphoned of the goods and report was lodged with the police.  It was also asserted that if the goods are not traced, the cost of the goods will be paid to the petitioner.  Even after lapse of 5 months, the respondent neither delivered the goods nor paid the cost.  Petitioner filed a complaint before the District Forum seeking a direction to the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.2,08,444/- being the price of the goods and Rs.24,318/- as interest as well as refund of Rs.4,000/- paid in advance for transportation of the goods.

          District Forum dismissed the complaint, aggrieved agasint which the petitioner had filed Revision Petitions No.1022/2006 and 1023/2006 before this Commission.  This Commission relying upon the judgment of Supreme Court in ““Transport Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Veljan Hydrair Ltd. reported in (2007) 3 SCC 142” allowed the Revision Petitions and remanded the case to the State Commission for a fresh decision in the light of observations made by Supreme Court in Transport Corporation’s case (supra) and the order of this Commission.

          The State Commission in terms of the directions issued by this Commission in aforesaid two Revision Petitions decided the appeals afresh.  The appeals were allowed in the following terms :

“Resulting, Appeal of appellants is accepted and impugned order dated 22.7.1997 of the forum is set aside and it is order that respondents/opposite parties No. 1 & 2 will pay the cost of mustard Rs.2,08,442/- and Rs.4000/-, which received in advance, to the appellants.  Apart from this they will pay Rs.10,000/- as damages.

Similarly in Appeal No.2008/1997, the appeal of appellants is accepted and impugned order dated 22.7.1997 of forum is set aside and it is ordered that respondent/opposite parties No.1 & 2 will pay the cost of mustard Rs.2,05,432/- and Rs.4000/-, which received in advance, to the appellants.  Apart from this they will pay Rs.10,000/- as damages.”

          Sh. Puneet Sharma, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent.  Counsel for the respondent states that the respondent has accepted the order of the State Commission and has already paid the awarded amount to the petitioner. 

The accident took place in the year 1995.  The complaint was filed in September, 1995.  Petitioner had become entitled to receive the amount which was awarded by the State Commission in the year 1995.  Petitioner has been deprived of use of that money for the last 15 years.  He is required to be compensated for the loss suffered by him.

          Accordingly, we direct the respondent to pay simple interest              @ 6% p.a. on the awarded amount w.e.f. the date of filing of the complaint till the date of payment.

          Counsel for the respondent assures us that the interest amount shall be paid to the petitioner within three months from today.

          Revision Petition stands disposed of in above terms.