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

RUMNITA MITTAL, LOKESHWAR PRASAD
P. C. SHIRANGANNAVAR – Appellant
Versus
ANAND HOUSEHOLD CARRIERS (REGD. ) – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : In person.
For the Respondents: None.

ORDER

Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Prasad, President—The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Act’) is directed against order dated 10.11.1997, passed by District Forum No.-III, in Complaint Case No. 43/97 entitled — Shri P.C. Shirangannavar v. M/s. Anand Household Carriers & Anr.

2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated, are that the appellant had filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Act, before the District Forum, averring that the appellant had hired the services of respondent No. 1 for carrying his household goods from his residence, situated at Shalimar Bagh, Delhi to Borivili, Bombay, and had entrusted 32 packages, containing household goods, to respondent No. 1 for transportation from Shalimar Bagh, Delhi to Borivili, Bombay, on 15.9.1993. The abovesaid packages, as per the case of the appellant, could not be transported immediately and remained in the custody of respondent No. 1 at Delhi, due to All India Transport Operators’ strike. The goods were finally despatched by respondent No. 1 from Delhi to Bombay through respondent No. 2 vide consignmen












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