Before the High Court the Union of India companyceded that the numberices were duly served on the General Manager, Southern Railway and the plaintiff elected to ask for a decree against the Southern Railway only.
The respondent filed Suit No.
The case is governed by the Indian Railways Act, as it stood in 1951.
The Trial Court held that the numberices under Section 77 of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 and Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure were number duly served and dismissed the suits.
The appellant called witnesses from Raipuram, Bhadrak and Kharag pur.
The respondent filed suit No.
He stopped the train at Bakhrabad, the next station.
Of the 10 bales companysigned, only 1 bale was delivered to the respondent.
The present appeals have been filed on certificates granted by the High Court.
The defective companydition of its seal escaped the numberice of the guard earlier.
Three packages were later recovered but numberevidence was led to prove that they were offered to the respondent.
The wagon was carried upto Waltair where the Southern Railways ended.
Presumably wagon No.
37933.
The plaintiff filed two appeals.
37933 open and the seal card hanging on the ring.
Had the wagon been properly fastened and secured it is number likely that the packages would be so easily taken out at Contai Road.
As the staff at Bakhrabad station was short, numberarrangement companyld be made for picking up the bales lying near the railway track.
The guard was present in companyrt at the hearing of the case.
87933 was interfered with between Contai Road and Bakhrabad and the bales lying by the side of the track were dropped from this wagon.
6 of 1952 against the Union of India, representing the two railway administrations claiming number delivery of 9 bales.
The loss of the bales was due to theft in transit when the train was on the run between Contai Road and Bakhrabad.
The wagon was checked and the suit packages were found missing.
7 of 1952 against the Union of India representing the two railway administrations claiming damages for number delivery of 5 bales.
The goods were carried at owners risk rate, and Sections 74C 3 and 74D of the Act were attracted.
Danton is about 126 kilometres away from Bhadrak.
Three bales were recovered but the party refused to take delivery.
No witness was called to prove that the seal was found intact at Danton.
No witness from Vizianagram was called.
On the adjourned date the guard was number examined number was the book produced and numberexplanation was given for this omission.
On arrival at Kharagpur he found the door of wagon No.
to which the goods had been delivered for carriage to a station on the Darjeeling Himalayan Rly.
was number responsible for the loss occurring on the latter railway.
The witness from Bhadrak checked the wagon and found the seal intact.
It is surprising that after having made this disclosure the appellant did number call the guard or any other witness from Contai Road or Bakhrabad.
The adjournment was granted.
The witnesses from Kharagpur found that the wagon was without seal and rivet on one side.
The two companyrts companycurrently held that the loss was due to negligence or misconduct of the servants of the Bengal Nagpur Railway administration.
On March 28, 1951 the respondent companysigned 10 bales of staple fiber varn to Podnur on the Southern Railway for carriage to Shalimar on the Bengal Nagpur Railway at the owners risk rate.
The High Court held that the Southern Railway to which the goods were delivered by the companysignor was liable to pay companypensation for the loss, though the loss was due to the negligence or misconduct of the Bengal Nagpur Railway.
At the close of the evidence an application for adjournment was moved by the appellant stating that the rough journal book of the guard was misled and some time was necessary to trace it.
The written statement did number mention any transhipment at Raipuram Madras but at the trial it was proved that the companysignments were transhipped at Rat puram in wagon No.
After starting form Contai Road the guard numbericed some bales lying on the left side of the track between Contai Road and Bakhrabad.
The written statement shows that the seal was checked at Danton.
Having regard to the disclosure made in the written statement, it was for the appellant to prove that it had kept proper watch over the wagon while the train was detained at Contai Road and had taken proper care of the packages lying on the track.
S. Bachawat, J. On March 28, 1951 the respondent companysigned 10 bales of staple fiber yarn to the Southern Railway at Pudukad for carriage to Shalimar on the Bengal Nagpur Railway at the owners risk rate.
Of the 10 bales companysigned, only 5 bales were delivered to the respondent.
