SHREENATH TRAVEL AGENCY Vs. SHREE CHEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the opposite parties against the order dated 3.1.1997 passed in case No.137/94 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Indore (for short the 'district Forum' ).

(2.) Facts giving rise to this appeal are thus : that the complainant booked consignment for delivering it to the consignee at Ahmedabad on payment of consideration of Rs.40/- of which a consignment note was issued. The contents of the consignment were not disclosed nor their value. The appellant as the carrier of the goods delivered the consignment to the consignee, who refused to take the delivery stating that this is not the same drum which was booked and handed over to the appellants at Indore. The complainant claimed the amount of Rs.72,072/- and interest thereon. Thereafter, a complaint was filed under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the 'act') which was resisted by taking various legal and factual pleas. The District Forum after appreciation of evidence and material on record ordered payment of Rs.72,072/- with interest thereon from 1.3.1994 at the rate of 18% p. a. to the complainant alongwith the costs of the proceedings of Rs.500/-.

(3.) Mr. P. K. Pancholi, learned Counsel for the appellants contended that the consignment booked vide consignment note No.4080 on payment of Rs.40/- without disclosing the contents and their value. According to condition No.1 the appellants would not have accepted the goods of the value more than Rs.2,000/-. According to condition No.6 for any type of loss the appellants will not be held liable, (i) any amount exceeding to Rs.2,000/- for the loss in total, and (ii) Rs.50/- per kg. maximum upto Rs.2,000/- whichever is less. On consignment note, it was clearly written "contents not known nor the value of the goods". Conditions printed over-leaf are binding on the parties. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Bharti Knitting Company V/s. DHL Worldwide Express Courier Division of Airfreight Limited, 1996 2 CPJ 25 (SC), and the decision of Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Indrapuri Express Courier and Ors. V/s. Modern Agencies,1995 2 CPJ 179 (Maharashtra S. C.), if at all there was liability, it cannot be more than Rs.2,000/-. It was submitted that allegation made in the complaint and in the defence version requires acute and complicated questions of law and fact, therefore, the District Forum ought to have directed the complainant to approach the Civil Court.