SYNDICATE BANK Vs. AFRICANA CO PRIVATE LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Mathew without delivery of goods for shipment obtained from D. W. 2 four bills of lading. He endorsed two of them to the appellant Bank in A. S. No. 192 of 1971 for a consideration of Rs. 60,000/-, and the remaining two, to the appellant Bank in the connected appeal for a consideration of Rs. 40,000/-. The banks advanced the amounts in good faith and unaware of non delivery of goods to the carrier by their customer, the pretended shipper D. W. 2 who signed the bills of lading, at the material time was the office manager of a Company doing business as agent of a shipping company. The question for consideration is as to whether the shipping company and the agent company are liable on the tour bills of lading, either for the price of the goods as prayed for in A. S.192 of 1971 or for the amount advanced by the bank as sought for in the other case; are the companies estopped from proving the falsity of the bills of lading, as contended on behalf of the Banks.

(2.) The points of law that arise for examination are:- (1) What rights, if any, a pretended consignor, has on a false bill of lading; (2) Does the transferee of a false bill of lading acquire any greater right than the pretended shipper had.

(3.) A bill of lading is: (i) a receipt for goods entrusted for carriage by sea; (ii) evidence of the contract to carry them; and (iii) title deed for those goods. Ellerman and Bucknall Steamship Co. v. S. M. Bherajee ( AIR 1966 SC 1892 at 1896 : 1967 (1) MLJ 81 ). As receipt it contains an admission of having received the goods mentioned therein. This admission, as any other admission, is not conclusive proof of the matter admitted, that is, of having received the goods, and can be proved to be erroneous, of course, subject to rules of estoppel. The pretended shipper knows that be has not delivered the goods and cannot, therefore, seek refuge under the doctrine of estoppel. In other words, as against the pretended shipper it can be proved that the admission contained in a bill of lading is false and erroneous, and that he did not in fact deliver goods. Once it is proved that goods were not entrusted by the shipper for carriage by sea, a bill of lading cannot also serve the purpose of evidence of the contract of carriage or of title deed.