Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

          This appeal is directed against the order dated 30/04/2010 passed in consumer case No.78/07 M/s Uniworth Textiles Ltd. Vs.U.T.Worldwide (I) Pvt.Ltd. and Anr. by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai Suburban at Bandra (the forum in short). This is an appeal filed by original complainant not satisfied with the part relief granted in its favour. It appears that original Opponent/Respondent have not preferred any appeal challenging the impugned order and thus submitted to it.

          We heard Adv.N.S.Wadiyalwar appearing for the appellant. Perused the record. Undisputed facts are that appellant /complainant had to supply All wool Piece Dyed Worsted Finished Fabric to M/s Airotech Holding Ltd. the party situated at U.K. The transaction was processed through M/s HSBC Bank Ltd. U.K. Respondent/ Opponent No.1 U.T. worldwide is a forwarding agent of Respondent/ Opponent No.2 Kuwait Airways. Their services were hired to tranship the cargo from Mumbai to destination at U.K. It is submitted by the complainant that Respondent/ Opponent’s failed to discharge their obligation to inform the consignee immediately on arrival of the goods and thus, there was deficiency in service on their part in making delivery of the cargo as per the instructions given. Consequently, the consumer case was filed and the same is partly allowed directing Respondent/ Opponent No.2 Air Cargo Carrier Kuwait Airways to pay compensation of `1,83,526/- alongwith interest @ 6% from 31/10/2005 till realization to cover the loss against value of the cargo. It was further directed to pay `5000/- as cost. However, not satisfied with it, the original complainant filed this appeal.

          In the given case, Opponents also challenged their liability for compensation inviting attention to provisions of Carriage By Air Act, however, forum below rightly dismissed their such contention holding that the proviso to rule 25 of Schedule 2 of the said Act is attracted in the instant case. Since the air cargo carrier Kuwait Airlines did not challenge the said decision in favour of the Appellant/complainant, we  need not to go further into it.

          The complainant asked for compensation of `10,98,901.81 for the loss suffered by it due to cancellation of order. However loss in business can not be a subject matter of Consumer Dispute. Furthermore, appellant/complainant is already compensated with the value of the goods alongwith interest. Therefore, not allowing any compensation towards loss of business can not be faulted. Similar is the case in respect of claim of compensation of `1 lac. Need not to say that the complainant is a company but it has measurably failed to establish its claim for compensation of `1 lac. Under the circumstances, even not granting such a relief by the Forum can not be faulted with.

          For the reasons stated above, we find that the appeal is devoid of any substance. Holding accordingly, we pass the following order.

                                                ORDER

          Appeal stands dismissed in limine.

          No order as to costs.

Pronounced  on 14/3/2011