INTERNAL ROAD SERVICES Vs. NARESH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is transporter. Respondent availed its services of transportation of goods of the value of Rs. 3,66,067 from Bombay to Delhi. The goods were not delivered on the excuse that these were destroyed in an accident. The respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum and obtained the impugned order dated 9.4.1996 whereby the appellant was directed to pay the aforesaid amount with 15% interest and Rs. 1,000 towards cost of litigation.

(2.) THE appellant raised a few preliminary objections as to the maintainability of the complaint before the District Forum which were well taken care of by the District Forum and there is little to add in respect of the finding returned by the District Forum. The first objection was that since the goods were transported for commercial purposes, the respondent was not a consumer as defined under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 .

(3.) APPARENTLY the services were obtained only for the purpose of transportation of goods against consideration and not for further transmission of the services to earn profit and, therefore, the services of the kind provided by the appellant and availed by the respondents fall within the definition of service for personal use. Similarly, the objection that the aforesaid Forum has no territorial jurisdiction was also repelled rightly. Merely because there was stipulation on the documents that services were availed at Calcutta and accident took place in Rajasthan and the aforesaid goods were to be delivered at Delhi does not mean that Delhi Forum has no jurisdiction.