NAZIMUDDIN S/O SHARIFUDDIN Vs. RUPAK KUMAR AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 30.06.2010 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called District Forum for short) in Complaint Case No.107/2010, whereby the complaint was allowed and the OP transporter was directed to pay a sum of Rs.6,13,760/ - together with interest @ 6% p.a. and Rs.10,000/ - towards mental harassment and Rs.1,000/ - towards cost of litigation.

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that the complainant had purchased 32 ton sugar worth Rs.6,13,760/ - through M/s Tirupati Sugars, Akola, Maharashtra and said lot of sugar was to be transported from Pusad to Raipur by the OP. OP prepared the builty no. 947 for transportation of aforesaid 32 ton sugar vide truck bearing no. C.G. 04 / J.A.3287 dated 31.01.2009 from Pusad, Tah. Mahegaon, to Raipur. The transporter had assured that the goods will be delivered at Raipur within a period of 5 days. As the sugar did not reach the destination, the complainant enquired about the same and subsequently served legal notice on 25.04.2009 under Section 10 of Careers Act, 1865, which was delivered to the OP, still neither the delivery of sugar was given nor the amount paid towards price of the sugar. In stead, the OP sent false reply to the notice. It was alleged in the complaint that the lot of sugar was lost due to negligence of OP and his employees. Hence, the OP is liable to make good the loss suffered by the complainant.

(3.) IN the written version, the OP raised objection regarding territorial jurisdiction. It was averred that no cause of action has arisen during territorial jurisdiction of the District Forum, nor the OP resides or carries on business at Raipur, but he is settled at Akola, Maharashtra and hence, the complaint was not maintainable. It was further averred in written version that the complainant has not impleaded the truck owner and insurer as party and further that the truck owner and driver have been arrested and challan has been filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahegaon, under Section 407, 477, 465, 471 / 34 of Indian Penal Code. It was further averred that the police has seized the property and the complainant is free to obtain the same on Supurdnama. It was averred in the written version that the builty was not prepared by the OP. The broker, Purusottam Sawarkar himself had got the goods transported. The complainant has preferred the complaint against the OP simply in order to harass him. Hence, it was prayed that the complaint be dismissed subject to compensatory cost of Rs.1,00,000/ -.