JAYPEE EXPORTS LTD. Vs. EVERGREEN MARINE COPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant Jay Pee Exports Limited is recognised export house exporting garments from India. He had entrusted the Respondent No.1 for carriage of about 300 packages of garments from Delhi to Miami, USA after complying with the required formalities. However, on arrival of the shipment in Miami, the consignee did not take steps to release the goods. When Respondent No.1 brought this to the notice of the complainant, the complainant identified another buyer in Durban, South Africa and advised Respondent No.1 to deliver the shipment to Respondent No.2, i.e., P&O Containers Ltd. for carrying the same from Miami to Durban. Accordingly Respondent No.2 agreed to carry the consignment to Durban and issued a Bill of Lading bearing No.DFEUNEW 925545 dated March 26,1993. The Bill of Lading showed that the complainant was a shipper/consignor. The consignee was NED Bank, Durban and the party to be notified was Carington Trading Pvt., Ltd., Durban.

(2.) The standard procedure in export shipment is that the consignor would forward the Original Bill of Lading through his local Bank to the Bank's Branch/Associate at the destination, the carrier would notify the arrival of shipment to the notified party which is Carington Trading Pvt. Ltd. who in turn would make payments to the consignee Bank which is NED Bank who in turn would handover the original Bill of Lading to the notified party. The notified party would present the Original Bill of Lading to the carrier to get the goods released.

(3.) It is alleged that Respondent No.2 P&O Co. failed to respond to the complainant's inquiry as to the fate of this shipment having got no proper response wrote a letter on 22.12.1993 informing the Respondent No.2 that he is sending his representative to Durban to finalise the release of the shipment by the consignee and till then Respondent No.2 should not take any steps to auction the consignments. The complainant's representative thereafter met Respondent No.2 on 5.8.1994 at the latter's New Delhi Office and having come to know that the consignment was released to the notified party in May, 1994, made inquiries with his own bankers about receipt of payment from the NED Bank. Since his Bank informed him that no payments were received, and since no reply was coming forth to his letter of 6.8.1994 enquiring about the fate of his shipment from Respondent No.2, the complainant sent his representative to Durban, South Africa to elicit proper information. Having failed to receive any proper information about the shipment, he filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of Respondent No.2 and claiming certain relief as mentioned in the complaint.