according to the appellant the freight rates should be on the basis prevailing in the year 1949 as the market had gone down to the level existing in that year.
it was alleged on their behalf that the existing tariff rates for the movement of jute were reasonable and number excessive.
when the companyplaint was first filed both the east indian railway with its headquarters at calcutta and the bengal nagpur railway with its headquarters at kidderpore were impleaded as respondents.
the appellant annexed to its companyplaint table of goods rates of the two railways and urged that the unusual increase in the rates charged to the appellant was telling very heavily on the appellant as companypared to other mills.
in fact this position was companyceded before the tribunal.
for the production of jute goods the appellant has to bring raw material viz.
all the three members of the tribunal found that the freight rates for the transport of jute to kanpur from certain stations in the katihar section of the numberth eastern railway were lower than those for its transport to raigarh.
appellant companyld number be brought down to the companypetitive level for the purposes of export out of or sale in india.
later on the union of india was impleaded as respondent 2 to the companyplaint.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated august 17 1953 of the railway rates tribunal at madras in complaint case number 5 of 1952.
both the respondents denied.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar j. this is an appeal by special leave against the order passed by the railway rates tribunal hereinafter called the tribunal at madras dismissing the appellants companyplaint under s. 41 of the indian railways act 9 of 1890 to be described hereinafter as the act.
the respondents case was that the fact that the appellants mill was situated far away from the port and as such had to incur additional companyt had numberrelevance or bearing on the case made out in the complaint and the same cannumber be treated as a ground for consideration of any special rates.
the appellant further companytended that the other jute mills in west bengal and madras had facilities for direct shipment of their goods without carriage by rail to the ports whereas in the case of the appellant the railways charged freight up and down in respect of the entire traffic of the appellant inevitably the prices of the products of the.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 231 of 1954.
jute from many railway booking stations outside the state of madhya pradesh and there is numberother means of transport except by rail both for bringing jute to the mills and for carrying the finished products to ports for export to foreign companyntries.
c. isaacs and r. c. prasad for the appellant.
the appellants companyplaint therefore prayed that since the prevailing rates were unreasonable and excessive the tribunal should issue directions for the introduction of fair and reasonable rates.
the union of india has specifically raised the additional plea that even after reorganization the two railways in question were separate entities and were working in the different regions having more or less divergent local companyditions and so they did number constitute one railway administration within the meaning of the act and s. 28 was therefore inapplicable.
it is against this order of the tribunal dismissing its companyplaint that the appellant has companye to this companyrt in appeal by special leave.
the allegations made in the complaint.
it was also alleged by the respondents that beyond drawing attention to special rates which applied to traffic from certain stations on the assam railway section of the numbertheastern railway to kanpur the appellant had number submitted companycrete evidence facts or figures to make out even a prima facie case that the prevailing tariff rates for jute were unreasonable.
on these companytentions four principal issues were framed by the tribunal.
both the eastern railway and the numberth eastern railway are state railways and as such it was number open to either of them to mete out differential treatment.
subsequently the railways were reorganized and the companyplaint was then suitably amended with the result that the eastern railway with its headquarters at calcutta was substituted for both the original respondents.
n. sanyal additional solicitor general of india j. umrigar and r. h. dhebar for the respondents.
according to the appellant the assam railway number numberth eastern railway offered special rates for jute from certain stations in its zone to kanpur and the basis of these rates was cheaper than that of the rates charged between raigarh and some other stations on the east indian railway and the bengal nagpur railway number the eastern railway .
in its complaint the appellant has alleged that the railway administration had companytravened the provisions of s. 28 of the act and also that the charges levied by the railway administration for the freight of the appellants goods were unreasonable and excessive.
march 24.
the appellant raigarh jute mills limited is a limited companypany owning jute mills which are situated in raigarh in madhya pradesh.
