COMMERCE HOUSE Vs. SAVANI TRANSPORT LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is directed against the order dated 26.5.1999 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called as the 'district Forum' for short) in Case No.366/1998 whereby the complaint of the complainant regarding recovery of the price, of the goods transported by the opposite parties/respondents was dismissed.

(2.) Relevant undisputed facts are : that two consignments of Rexine coated cloth were booked on 14.3.1997 and 25.3.1997 for being delivered at Allahabad and another consignment was also booked on 29.1.1997 to be delivered at Bangalore. None of the aforementioned consignments was however delivered. It is also not in dispute that the two consignments to be delivered at Allahabad could not be so delivered as they were seized by the Sales Tax authorities at Jhansi Check-post due to want of Form-31 required under the Sales Tax Act and under Rule 26 (6) of the Sales Tax Rules. The consignment booked on 29.1.1997 to be delivered at Bangalore, however, reached inordinately late there and the consignee in whose favour the consignment was booked namely M/s. Jansons Motor Accessories of Bangalore, cancelled the order and the consignment as above has now been brought back by the respondents to Raipur on instructions from the appellant/consignor.

(3.) The complainant alleged that the non-delivery of the consignments has resulted in loss to him. He claimed total compensation of Rs.42,960/- with interest, etc. thereon. The complaint as above was resisted by the respondents/transporters. According to them, the consignment was seized as the appellant had not furnished Form No.31 as required under the Sales-tax Act and the Rules framed thereunder. It was also averred that the consignments to be delivered at Bangalore was brought back by him but the appellant has not taken delivery thereof despite intimation given to him.