( 1 ) DELAY condoned.

( 2 ) APPEAL admitted.

( 3 ) A complaint was filed for recovery of Rs. 21,04,835. 83 p. by the appellant against the respondent under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, the national Commission ). According to the complaint, the respondent was a common carrier and was liable to compensate the appellant for the loss suffered because the appellant had effected delivery of goods entrusted to it by the appellant without obtaining the original lorry receipts from the consignee.

( 4 ) THE National Commission followed its earlier decision in the case of delhi Assam Roadways Corporation v. B. L. Sharma (First Appeal No. 107 of 2001) decided on 12th December, 2002 and held that in the absence of a notice under Section 10 of the Carriers Act, 1865, the complaint cannot be entertained under the Consumer Protection Act against a common carrier. The special leave petition filed against the decision in the case of B. L. Sharma (supra) was dismissed by recording that the Court saw no reason to interfere with the reasoning of the National Commission.

( 5 ) BEFORE us, the learned counsel for the appellant ha