RAJU Vs. SAVANI TRANSPORT LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Mr. Raju was one of the two opposite parties before the State Commission, where the respondent Savani Transport Limited had filed a complaint, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the 2 opposite parties mentioned in the complaint before the State Commission.

(2.) Very briefly the facts of the case are that M/s. Ashok Leyland, with a view to transport certain goods from Hosur to Jabalpur, got in touch with the respondent/complainant. The respondent/complainant entered into an agreement with the appellant who, in turn, allegedly hired the truck belonging to one Mr. Samiulaah. This truck met with an accident in Hyderabad and delivery of the goods was not made. It is in these circumstances that a complaint was filed by the complainant before the State Commission, praying for recovery of Rs. 9,20,250. Upon issue of notice, the appellant before us alone, filed his reply; the second OP neither appeared nor filed any reply. Based on material on record and after hearing the parties, the complaint was allowed and the appellant along with second respondent Mr. Samiulaah were directed to pay the complainant a sum of Rs. 7,20,250 along with interest @ 12% p.a. on the sum of Rs. 7,00,000 from 21.12.1999 till date of payment. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant has filed this appeal before us.

(3.) We heard the learned Counsel for the appellant at some length. His main line of argument as also the main plea taken in the Memorandum of Appeal relates to that appellant is only a transport broker, is not a transporter and the documents on which State Commission relied, have been misread, leading to a wrong conclusion by the State Commission.