9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 1173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Rania and Anil Kumar Jha for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Variava, J.-This appeal is against an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 11-3-1999. 2. Briefly stated, the facts are as follows : 3. The first respondent had entrusted to the appellant 125 cartons of goods, of the value of Rs. 9,30,188 for transport from Nanguneri to Itchalkaranji. The goods were not delive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion which has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 11-3-1999. Hence this appeal. 5. The only question raised before us is whether an insurance company is a consumer vis-a-vis the appellant, and as such, consumer can file a complaint before the consumer forum. 6. In the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. B.N. Sainani [1997] 6 SCC 383, this Court has held that assignee of a mere r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is held that even the addition of the consignor as a co-complainant would not enable the insurer to maintain such a complaint. In this judgment - the terms of 'letter of subrogation' (in that case) are also set out. The main terms are, more or less, identical to the terms of the 'letter of subrogation' in the present case. On an interpretation of those terms, this Court has held that such a 'lett ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the letter of subrogation, and submitted that, in this case, there was no assignment, but a mere subrogation. He submitted that the complaint was, thus, maintainable. 9. In our view, it is not necessary to decide whether a complaint would be maintainable, if there was merely subrogation. The main terms of the letter of subrogation in this case are identical to the letter of subrogation in Obera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
