(1.) The complaint of the appellant seeking refund of Rs.44,895/- paid by him to the respondent who is an agent of shipping lines was dismissed vide order dated 1.3.1996. Feeling dissatisfied the appellant has preferred this appeal.
(2.) Primary facts more or less are not in dispute. A contract of carriage was entered into with the respondent M/s. P and O Containers for delivery of two containers containing goods imported from Korea by the appellant which were bound for Bombay. The consignment arrived at Bombay on 8.4.1992. On 16.4.1992 the appellant contacted the respondent for transferring the containers to Delhi to which the respondent agreed. The consignment arrived at Delhi on 21.5.1992. On being informed about the arrival of the consignment on 22.5.1992 the appellant contacted the respondent for taking delivery the respondent raised a debit note/bill amounting to a sum of Rs.70,587/- showing Rs.39,813/- Rs.2,201/- as detention and demurrage charges and Rs.21,600/- as handling charges. However, the appellant made the payment under protest and received the consignment.
(3.) The grievance of the appellant is that the respondent not only took longer time in transporting container from Bombay to Delhi for which he was required to pay Rs.1,000/- per day as detention charges and this act on the part of the respondent amounts to deficiency in service and entitles the appellant to seek refund of the amount charged by the respondent in this regard. On the contrary the learned Counsel for the respondent has relied upon a letter dated 16.8.1992 sent by the appellant wherein request for transferring the consignment to Delhi was made. The relevant extracts of the said letter are as under: "with reference to the above we hereby request you to allow us to amend the I. G. M. from local to I. C. D. Delhi on payment of your usual charges of Container Detention. For your kind information we undertake to pay all your dues such as BPT/railway/custom Amendment fees as per receipt of Delhi office, I. C. D. Delhi and oblige. "