POWERFLOW LTD vs VIKAS ROADLINES (I) PVT.LTD

IN this complaint under Section 17 read with Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complainants have sought compensation in a sum of Rs. 1,56,124/- with interest thereon from the opposite party, transporter.

COMPLAINANT No. 1 Messrs. Powerflow Ltd. entrusted 43 cartons of Copper Enamelled Cable Wire, weighing 1100 kgs. worth Rs. 1,41,573.36 p. to the opposite party-carrier, to be carried from Bangalore to New Delhi on 21.10.89. The said goods were insured with complainant No. 2 Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Opposite party did not carry the said goods and delivered the same to the consignee at New Delhi. The opposite party issued a certificate to the complainants on 11.6.90 stating that the goods were "not found traceable".

As the goods were insured by complainant No. 1 with complainant No. 2 made claim with complainant No. 2 and obtained payment of a sum of Rs. 1,56,124/- inclusive of all claims from complainant No. 2.

THE complainants further averred that the opposite party acted with gross negligence in not carrying goods entrusted to it to the consignee at New Delhi, thereby the complainants sustained loss, as referred above. The opposite party though served remained absent. No version came to be filed.

THE complainants filed their affidavits and got Exs. C 1 to C 7 marked in evidence. We heard the learned consumer for complainants 1 and 2, perused the pleadings and the material on record. Ext. C 7 is the lorry receipt issued by the opposite party in favour of complainant No. 1 on entrustment of 43 cartons of Copper Enamelled Cable Wire weighing 1100 kgs. to carry the same to New Delhi, the value of which has been mentioned as Rs. 1,41,573.36 ps. Ex. C6 is the invoice of the said material. That also shows that the value of the said material as Rs. 1,40,526.05 p. Ext. C 5 is the certificate issued by the opposite party which is dated 11.6.90. That shows that the copper wire entrusted to the opposite party under the said consignee note Ex. C 7 was not delivered to the consignee at New Delhi but they were found "not traceable". Therefore, it is clear that the opposite party, the carrier did not carry the goods entrusted to it to New Delhi and acted negligently in not delivering the goods to the consignee at New Delhi.

COMPLAINANT No. 1 when the goods were not delivered by the opposite party, the carrier, made claim with complainant No. 2 the Insurer as perEx.C2 in a sum of Rs. 1,56,124.44ps. COMPLAINANT No. 2 made payment of the said amount to complainant No. 1, which complainant No. 1 admitted the receipt of the same and on receipt of the said amount executed a letter of subrogation-cum-special power of attorney as per Ext. C 1 in favour of complainant No. 2, the Insurance Company. So having regard to these facts, complainant No. 2-the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. is entitled to get the said amount of Rs. 1,56,124.44 ps. from the opposite party with interest thereon from the date of its payment i.e., from 2.7.90 on which date complainant No. 2 made payment of the said amount to complainant No. 1, till the date of its payment by the opposite party to complainant No. 2.

IN the result, therefore, this complaint is allowed. Opposite party-M/s. Vikas Road Lines (1) Pvt. Ltd., is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,56,124.44 ps. to complainant No. 2-the Oriental INsurance Company Ltd. with interest@ 14% p.a. from 2.7.90 till the date of its payment to complainant No. 2. The opposite party shall also pay a sum of Rs. 2,500/- to the 2nd complainant-the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. towards costs of this proceeding.

The opposite party shall pay the sums so awarded to complainant No. 2 within a period of 60 days from this date. Complaint allowed with costs.