JUDGMENT - Mr. Justice G.G. LONEY, President :---This is an appeal arising out of order of Dist. Forum, Jalna dated 30-1-1993 passed in Complaint No. 24 of 1992. The complainant alleged in his complaint before the Dist. Forum that he had entrusted his goods for transportation to the opposite party namely Vijay Transport Co. for consideration of Rs. 1,959/-. The complainant alleged that his goods were not delivered at the destination by the opposite party and they were delivered wrongly to one Mahavir Traders. According to the complainant, the service rendered by the opposite party was deficient as a result of which he has been put to loss of Rs. 49,852.50 and therefore he claimed the price for the loss of his goods and Rs. 10,000/- as compensation. The opposite party filed its written version in which it has admitted that the goods were not delivered at the destination because the documents given to the truck driver were lost during transit. The claim of the complainant for the compensation was therefore, opposed. The Dist. Forum found that the complainants claim was proved on the basis of admission given by the opposite party and allowed the claim of the complainant of Rs. 49,852.50 towards the compensation for the loss suffered by him to be paid with the interest @ 18% p.a. and also awarded Rs. 10,000/- for further compensation, and Rs. 500 as cost. We have heard Shri Desai, advocate for the appellant and the respondent. According to Shri Desai, it is an admitted fact that the complainant had hired the services of Vijay Transport Co. for delivery of the goods at the destination, but due to loss of the documents by the truck driver, the goods were delivered at wrong destination. It is also admitted that the goods were delivered to a person who had some money transaction with the complainant and therefore, the compensation has been wrongly granted by the Dist. Forum. We are not in agreement with the argument advanced by Shri Desai in as much as in view of his admission that the goods were not delivered at the destination, the deficiency in the service of the opposite party had been conclusively proved. The complainant lost his goods worth Rs. Forum. We are not in agreement with the argument advanced by Shri Desai in as much as in view of his admission that the goods were not delivered at the destination, the deficiency in the service of the opposite party had been conclusively proved. The complainant lost his goods worth Rs. 49,852.50/- and therefore, he is entitled to claim the same amount towards the compensation with the interest @ 18% p.a. However, in our view the grant of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation appears to be incorrect. Hence, we pass the following order : Order 2. Appeal is partly allowed. The order of the Dist. Forum, Jalna is maintained with the modification that the grant of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation is hereby set aside. Parties shall bear respective costs. Appeal partly allowed. *****