The impalement of necessary parties and the mandatory nature of the notice under Section 10 of the Carriers Act are crucial for maintaining a complaint.

1. This is an appeal against the majority judgment of the District Forum, Nainital whereby the complaint of the complainant was, dismissed while the President of the Forum has allowed the complaint.

2. In this case the case was Originally heard by the Bench consisting of the President and Male Member of the Forum. 'The President of the Forum vide his order dated 20.12.2003 allowed the complaint On this order Male Member Sh. B.S.-Dangwal did not sign. He wrote a separate order on 05.01.2004 much after the order of the President of the Forum and dismissed the complaint. On the judgment of the President, smt. Shashi Tandon, the Female Member endorsed on 17.07.2004 "I do not agree with this judgment". On the same date she endorsed on the' order of Sh. B.S. Dangwal “I, agree with this judgment". She however gave at separate judgment on 17.07.2004 holding that the complaint is not maintainable in-view of non-impleadment, of, the necessary party as also for want of notice under Section 10 of the Carriers Act. It appears that there was difference of opinion between the President and the Male Member of the Forum. The matter was referred to the third Member on her appointment on 17.07.2004. We do not want to go into this controversy, neither the parties preferred to raise' it that the judgment is valid or invalid or void because all the 3 persons have given separate judgments on separate dates, Both the parties argues the case on merits, therefore we preferred to proceed to hear the case on merits itself.

3. The complainant Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd. had booked medicines form Haldwani to Bareilly The booking was on 20.08.1997, 24.08.1997, 01.04.1998, again on 01.04.1998, 17.02.1998, then again on 17.02.1998, then on 02.06.1998. It is surprising that even the booking of 20.08.1997 was not delivered, still the complainant went on booking for about 10 months. All the G.R.’s were endorsed to the Punjab National Banjk Bareilly. According to the complainant, articles worth Rs. 2,44,211.17/- were booked bout these articles were never delivered at Bareilly. The Stockiest were directed to approach Bareilly to take the delivery but he informed that the consignment has not reached there. In pare 6 of the complaint, It is alleged that a registered notice was given on 28.06.1999 but in spite of the notice nothing was heard from the opposite parties. hence a compliant was filed.

4. The opposite parties filed written statement and alleged at the consignment, was booked. All the bookings, are separate transactions. for each booking booking, there is separate cause of action. The delivery was to be made by, Navrang Transport Corporation, Bareilly. The complainant is not a consumer. The provisions of Section 10 of the Carriers Act have not been complied with. The opposite parties, are not common carrier but the common carrier is Navrang Transport Corporation, Bareilly, who has acknowledged the delivery of the books under G.R.’s in dispute. The Transporter has not been made party to the proceedings and the complaint is liable be dismissed.

5. Since the complaint has been dismissed by the majority view of the Learned Forum, therefore the majority view is the judgment of the Learned Forum. We have to examine whether that order is correct or incorrect. The first question is regarding the impalement of Navrang Transport Corporation, Bareilly. It is true that the complaint could not have been dismissed on. this ground rather the complainant should• have been directed to imp-lead Navrang Transport Corporation, Bareilly if it was a necessary party but the complainant very emphatically contested the case there that they have got no privities of contract with Navrang Transport Corporation, Bareilly, they will not imp-lead them party because there is no dispute between them and Navrang Transport Corporation. Bareilly but in our view this argument is not at all correct. In all the G.R.'s, it is specifically mentioned that delivery shall be made through Na