MAJOR AMIT A KULKARNI Vs. HARI OM CARRIER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.598/2007 on the file of District Forum II, Hyderabad, the complainant preferred this appeal.

(2.) The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant who is working as Major in Indian Army at Hyderabad was transferred to Jammu and Kashmir and in the process of shifting he handed over his Maruti-800 car on 29.12.2006 to the opp.party for the purpose of transporting the same from Secunderabad to Delhi and the opp.party issued consignment note bearing no.1398 dt. 29.12.2006 and the complainant paid the transportation charges of Rs.4,000/-. The opposite party being the common carrier arranged the vehicle carrier container bearing no. HR 55 B 2281 and the complainants car was loaded into the vehicle carrier container and along with it two other vehicles were also placed in the same vehicle belonging to other military officers. On 29.12.06 at about 11.30 p.m. complainants colleague has received a message that the vehicle carrier container bearing No.HR 55 B 2281 had caught fire at Miyapur Cross Roads near Narsimha Cinema Hall and the complainant and his colleague went to the spot of the incident to check the condition of the vehicles and on the same night they lodged a complaint at Miyapur Police Station. The vehicle container provided by the opp.party contains two compartments which are meant exclusively for transporting the vehicles, the lower compartments are fully loaded with the plastic items such as glasses, plates and other packing products which are made of synthetic material which can easily catch fire . After completing the formalities the vehicles are handed over to the opposite party who in turn left the vehicles at Miyapur Police Station and the complainant took his vehicle and towed it to M/s.Acer Motors at Tirumalgherry, Secunderabad for the purpose of repairs by spending an amount of Rs.4000/-. The complainant got his vehicle insured with M/s.National Insurance Co. Ltd. The complainant incurred total expenditure of Rs.1,81,712/- to get his vehicle repaired, out of which the insurer has paid only Rs.1,19,500/- and hence he incurred Rs.62,212/- extra expenditure. The complainant submits that due to loading the container with plastic items made of synthetic material which can easily catch fire with even a minimum friction, the fire accident occurred and his vehicle burnt completely which amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant submits that due to deliberate negligence and misuse of carrier by the opp.party he had to incur expenditure and suffer mental agony and as such he is entitled for compensation of Rs.2 lakhs. The complainant approached the District Forum to direct the opp.party to pay Rs.2,87,652/- together with interest at 24% p.a. from 6.1.2007 till the payment is made and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards costs.

(3.) The opposite party filed counter stating that on 29.12.2006 the complainant had approached them with one Major Gaurav Singh to transport their cars from Secunderabad to Gurgaon and the opp.party provided excellent services to them and negotiated and liaisoned with Jai Mata Di Road Carriers and arranged a part car carrier and loaded the two cars in front of the complainant and Maj.Gaurav Singh at Old Bowenpally, Secunderabad in Lorry bearing no. HR-558 2281 of Swift Roadlines, shop no.25, Kapasera Border, Gurgon through Jai Mata Di Road Carriers, Plot no.108, Yadav Parking NH-7, Old Bowenpally, Secunderabad. The Maruti Car of the complainant was accepted on owners risk basis as per the consignment note no.1398 dt.29.12.2006 in which it is clearly indicated that the opp.party is not responsible for any leakage, breakage and damage to the goods transported. The opp.party was acting as a commission agent by paying freight charges of Rs.3,800/- to Jai Mata Di Road Carrier and in the said transaction it had benefit of only a sum of Rs.200/-. Opposite party further submits that the remaining portion of the carrier does not belong to them as it was loaded by some other transport companies through Jai Mat Di Road Carriers. The opposite party submits that they have not loaded any plastic items or glasses, plates or any other packing products but the said items were loaded by some other transporter and it was not in the compartment where the cars were loaded. The opposite party submits that the said plastic material are not the cause for fire and it is clearly mentioned that short circuit has caused fire to the Car Carrier and the same has been clearly stated in the charge sheet. The complainant has already received the amount from the Insurance Company as per the assessed damage and the claim made by the complainant against the opp.party is not tenable and the claim made by the complainant to the tune of Rs.2,87,652/- is more than the value of a new Maruti Car. The opposite party further submits that the Dist.Forum, Hyderabad has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the transaction took place within the jurisdiction of Dist. Forum, Rangareddy District and that there is no deficiency in their behalf and seeks dismissal of the complaint with costs.