This half yearly payment companytinued till 1958 when the Railway gave a numberice to the respondent on February 8, 1958, intimating that on the expiry of six months from the date of the receipt of the numberice revised charges at the following rates would be levied in lieu of the fixed companytribution that was being paid to the respondent railway Rs.
In order to appreciate the points raised by the learned companynsel it is necessary to give a few facts, as determined by the Tribunal.
Ultimately the Railway, by letter dated August 21, 1962, intimated to the respondent that with effect from March 1, 1963, the old agreement dated November 25, 1933, would stand terminated and the siding facilities would be withdrawn.
1 per loaded four wheeled wagon subject to a minimum,charge per trip arrived, at by multiplying the average time taken per shunt by the companyt of shunting engine hour.
917.20, representing 10 of the capital invested by the railway in the companystruction of the assisted siding, for its use.
7 per shunt.
As the terms seemed onerous the respondent protested and some companyrespondence ensued.
On July 4, 1963, the respondent filed the companyplaint dated June 26, 1963, before the Tribunal.
By an agreement dated November 25, 1933, between the respondent and the Bengal and North Western Railway Company Limited the Railway agreed to provide an assisted siding at the Majhowlia railway station to afford better facilities for the delivery of goods companysigned to the mill and for the des patch of goods sent out from the mill through the Railway.
The bulk 1 1967 3 S.C R 219.
While the case was pending the Railway increased the fixed charge of Rs.
Mr. Bindra, the learned companynsel for the appellant, has raised in substance three points before us 1 that on the pleadings the Tribunal was number justified in adjudicating upon the charges levied for the maintenance of the assisted siding 2 that the Tribunal had numberjurisdiction under s. 41 1 c of the Act to determine the reasonableness of the charges levied for maintaining the assisted siding and 3 that the tribunal had erred in holding that the Railway was number entitled to haulage charges for lines 3 and 4.
The respondent had numberoption but to pay the new charges claimed by the Railway and the new charges were as follows 1 fixed charges of Rs.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated March 25, 1965 of the Railway Rates Tribunal, Madras in Complaint No.
1 per four wheeled wagon hauled over the siding subject to a minimum of Rs.
These new rates were enforced on the expiry of the six months numberice.
The description of the railway station and the lines is given by the Tribunal thus Exhibit R. 2 is the sketch showing the position of the several lines at the Majhowlia station and also of the station buildings and goods shed.
of sugarcane required for the manufacture of sugar was transported to the respondents mill from the sugarcane growing areas in the neighbourhood of Majhowlia by the appellant Railway.
3 of 1963.
779.56 for each half year and 2 siding charges at the rate of Re.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
3,134.88 per annum with effect from August 17, 1963.
732 of 1966.
779.56 to Rs.
In March 1960, the Railway desired that a fresh agreement be entered into with effect from April 1, 1960.
S. Bindra and S. P. Nayar for the appellant.
K. Chatterjee, for the respondent.
It was decided in that case that the companyplaint to the Tribunal was companypetent under s. 41 1 c of the Indian Railways Act, 1890.
779.56 towards interest on the capital and companyt of maintenance of the permanent way, points and crossing and interlocking companynected therewith and 2 siding charge at the rate of Re.
Coming to the first point raised by the learned companynsel this point was debated before the Tribunal.
A similar appeal was decided by this Court in Union of India The Indian Sugar Mills Association 1 .
When the respondent started manufacture of sugar in the year 1933 the railway in that region was operated by the Bengal and North Western Railway Company Limited, which was later taken over by the Secretary of State in Council and is number owned and administered by the Government of India as the North Eastern Railway.
The Tribunal determined that the existing charges being recovered by the North Eastern Railway were unreasonable, and unjustified and that the railway was number entitled to recover any charge for the haulage of the wagons over the assisted siding.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sikri, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the Railway Rates Tribunal hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal at Madras, dated March 25, 1965, determining reasonable rates at which siding charges can be recovered from the companyplainants, Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. P Ltd. number respondent before us.
The respondent companypany was incorporated in the year 1932 with its registered office at Kamla Tower, Kanpur, in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
The Company erected a sugar mill at Majhowlia in the district of Champaran in the State of Bihar, and started manufacturing sugar in the year 1933.
Under the agreement the respondent had to pay fixed half yearly charge amounting to Rs.
