JUDGMENT

Bharucha, J.-The facts are set out only in so far as they are relevant to the two issues in this appeal, namely, whether the first respondent insurance company was subrogated to the rights of the second respondent consignor in respect of the lost consignment or whether it was the assignee of the rights of the second respondent in respect thereof, and, if the latter, whether it wsa a consumer within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, entitled to maintain a complaint thereunder.

2. The second respondent, throught its agent, hired two trucks from M/s. Bhasin Goods Carriers of Bareilly to transport broken rice to Barpeta, Assam. According to the appellant, it was asked by M/s. Bhasin Goods Carriers and the second respondent s agent only to settle the freight for the consignment, which it did. The trucks loaded with the consignment did not reach their destination and the consignment was lost.

3. The second respondent made a claim for the value of the consignment upon the first respondent, who had insured it, in the sum of Rs. 93,925.55. The claim was settled by the first respondent in the sum of Rs. 64,137/-, and that sum was paid to the second respondent.

4. Co