Case nº First Appeal No.687 of 2006 of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, August 08, 2008 (case Gulf Air Company GSC Vs Makers and Sellers Union)
| Judge | M. Girish Kumar, Abidali Beeran P, Kiran Suri, U. A. Rana, A. K. Rao |
| President | S. N. Kapoor (Presiding Member) & B. K. Taimni (Member) |
| Resolution Date | August 08, 2008 |
Judgment:
B. K. Taimni (Member)
1. The Appellant was the opposite party before the State Commission, where the first respondent, Makers and Sellers Union had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the second respondent, Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. and the Appellant Gulf Air Company GSC.
2. The facts as they emanate from the record are that the first respondent Makers and Sellers had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the second respondent Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. only, before the State Commission. The State Commission after hearing the parties dismissed the complaint against Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 15.10.96. Against that order, an appeal was filed before this Commission, wherein after hearing the parties, the matter was remanded back to the State Commission with a direction to implead Gulf Air Company, as the complainant had not made the Gulf Air Company, a party in the original complaint. On fresh hearing, after remand, the State Commission passed the order against Gulf Air Company and the second respondent, directing them to jointly pay Rs.6,91,165/- to the complainant alongwith interest @6% p.a. from the date of complaint till the realisation alongwith cost of Rs.5,000/-. Aggrieved by this order, this Appeal has been filed before us.
3. We heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties at some length. The basic facts as they emanate from the complaint are that the complainant who is an exporter of ready- made garments in Bangalore, sent two consignments through Gulf Air Flight by booking through Mercury Travels Ltd., Bangalore on 20.5.94, and 15.6.94. The complainant wrote to Jet Air Ltd. the second respondent on 8.11.94 that the cargo was delivered without collecting original documents, hence they suffered loss of Rs.6,84,125/-. When the matter was not getting sorted out, the complainant filed a complaint before the State Commission, which as already mentioned, was dismissed by the State Commission, against which an appeal was filed wherein it was remanded back and on remand the State Commission ordered the Appellant and the Second Respondent to pay the amount already mentioned earlier.
4. After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, we find that two Air Way Bills, dated 20.5.94 and 15.6.94, on record have been issued under the seal and signature of Mercury Travels Ltd. No document on record has been produced in any way associating the second Respondent...
To continue reading
Request your trial