DEEPAK GUPTA Vs. STANDARD TRANSPORT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly the facts are, that the complainant sent goods of the value of Rs.1,11,234/- through the respondent carrier to M/s. Aggarwal Agencies, Jaipur. The consignee of the goods receipt was M/s. Aggarwal Agencies. The goods were delivered by the respondent to M/s. Aggarwal Agencies on 14.10.91. It is alleged that the goods receipt was sent by the complainant to M/s. Aggarwal Agencies on 15.10.91 and the same was received by them on 16.10.91. It is further alleged that the said goods were delivered to M/s. Aggarwal Agencies prior to the date, when goods receipt was despatched by the complainant and thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. He has consequently, prayed that the respondent be directed to pay the price of the goods amounting to Rs.1,11,234/- to the complainant.

(2.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the complainant. It is admitted by the learned Counsel for the complainant that the consignee of the receipt was M/s. Aggarwal Agencies The goods receipt was sent directly to the consignee and not through a Dank. Under the aforesaid circumstances, if the goods were delivered by the respondent to the consignee of the goods prior to the date, when the goods receipt was received by the consignee, it cannot be held to be a deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. Consequently we do not find any merit in the complaint and dismiss the same in-limine. Complaint dismissed in-limine.