Prof. Sunil Kanti Kar, Member — The case of the complainant/appellant in short is that he transported certain goods from Calcutta to Bombay through Road Freight Carriers by truck No. MOT-9158. On transit some goods were damaged and some were not received at the destination at Bombay. Accordingly the complainant/appellant claimed Rs. 80,340/- on account of loss of goods and damage caused to it. It is admitted that the goods under consignment bearing Truck No. MOT-9158 were insured with the Insurance Company/Respondent No. 1. The main contention of the Insurer/Respondent No. 1 is that the complainant/appellant did not lodge the claim with the Transporter/Respondent No. 2 within 6 months as per Clause 8.2 of the Insurance agreement. It appears from the record that the goods arrived and unloaded on 26.5.89 at Bombay whereas the complaint was lodged to the Transporter/Respondent No. 2 by his letter dated 15.6.89, so the information to the Transporter/Respondent No. 2 was given within a month from the date of arrival of the goods at Bombay. It is not much material if it was informed to the transporter or not, the case lies elsewhere i.e., the Insurer/Respondent No. 1 having insured