SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

S.A.KADER, R.N.MANICKAM, RAMANI MATHURANAYAGAM
SUSHIL JAIN – Appellant
Versus
GANESH ROADWAYS – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Complainants :Mr. V. Nandakumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party :Mr. D. Ashok Kumar, Advocate.

ORDER

Mr. Justice S.A. Kader, President—This is a complaint under Section 17 read with Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

2. The fifth complainant is the partnership firm of which the complainants 1 to 4 are partners. They are carrying on business as Fleet Owners and Contractors for MRF Limited. The transporters have engaged the services of the opposite party who is a lorry broker for transport of tyres manufactured by MRF Limited from Arakonam to Pune on 10.3.93. The opposite party sent lorry No. MH -14 4194 and 300 tyres were loaded in the lorry for transport to Pune. The hire charge was fixed at Rs. 5,000/- and an advance of Rs. 3,000/- was paid to the opposite party. The consignment did not reach the destination. A police complaint has also been given, but the goods could not be traced. The value of the goods is estimated at Rs. 4,82,355-09. M/s. MRF Limited has debited the amount against the complainant. They have suffered heavy loss. The claim is made for recovery of the amount with interest at 24% p.a., Rs. 1500/- by way of compensation, Rs. 50,000/- as expenses and for costs.

3. The opposite party pleaded that it is only a lorry broker whose duty is only to supply lor





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top