AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE consignment containing parts of manufacture of Swaraj Mazda, a light commercial vehicle was received at Mumbai from Japan vide Invoice dated 8.12.1997. THEreafter the goods in question were transported through Truck No. RJ-01G-2090 from Mumbai to Chandigarh and from Chandigarh to Asron, District Ropar, Punjab by the respondent-transporter. THE goods were alleged to be insured with the New India Assurance Company. THEre was alleged pilferage during the transit and assessment of loss was made by Shri N.S. Sidhu, Surveyor. It has further been alleged that the Insurance Company directly made payment to the dealer in the sum of Rs. 6,32,962/- on 24.3.1999.
NOW the New India Assurance Company who has instituted this complaint against the respondent-Transporter for recovery of Rs. 6,32,962/- together with a further sum of Rs. 50,000/- and interest at the rate of 24% per annum, has specifically alleged in para No. 9 that it becomes subrogated. On behalf of the respondent-transporter, a reply has been filed wherein a preliminary objection has been raised that the Insurance Company is not a "consumer". In this regard, the decision of Supreme Court of India in Oberai Forwarding Agency v. New India Assurance Company Limited & Anr., dated 1.2.2000=I (2000) CPJ 7 (SC)=II (2000) SLT 86, has been relied upon. The learned Counsel for the respondent has stressed that the loss of consignment had already occurred and all that was assiged and transferred was the right to recover compensation for the loss. Any authority to the contrary has not been brought to our notice. Thus, the conclusion is that the complainant-Insurance Company cannot be deemed to be a "consumer" merely because the complainant possesses a letter of subrogation dated 2.7.1999, (Annexure C/13) notwithstanding the fact that M/s. Swaraj Mazda Limited has been impleaded as complainant No. 2, the complaint is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed.
The learned Counsel for the complainant has specifically desired that since this new interpretation and application of law of subrogation in such cases is the consequence of the very recent decision of Supreme Court, the complainant should have the concession of approaching the Civil Court and the period spent here should be exempted while working out limitation. We order accordingly. Complaint dismissed.