Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: consignee self in Shri Mahavir Prasad vs M/S Delhi Kanpur Golden on 18 January, 2017Matching Fragments
33. In the absence of proving himself as consignor of the goods, the present suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable as Section 10 to 12 of the Carriage By Road Act, 2007 dealing with the liability of the carrier only talks about the right of the consignor.
34. Now the question arose as to whether the plaintiff can be covered by the term 'Consginee'.
35. The answer is NO as the GR Ex PW1/5 to Ex PW1/56 do not bear the name of the plaintiff as consignee but rather against the column 'Consignee', the word used is "Self" which means the defendant No. 2 who has been named as consignor in the said exhibits.