SNEHALKUMAR SARABHAI Vs. ECONOMIC TRANSPORT ORGANISATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOT infrequently the Courts slam the door of the temple of justice in the face of a pilgrim (who has admittedly been wronged) at the behest of the proved wrongdoer solely on the ground that he has knocked at a different door. So often the Court considers itself to be helpless and turns away the hapless pilgrim under a mistaken assumption that entry is barred from the said door. The present case illustrates the point. Having recorded a clear finding that opponent No. 1 (original defendant No. 1), a Public Carrier, had failed to deliver a consignment of goods worth Rs. 1,207.92 to the petitioner plaintiff without any just cause and on merits was liable to reimburse him for the loss, the trial Court (at Ahmedabad) has refused to pass a decree granting relief solely on the ground that there was a printed clause at the back of the transport receipt obliging the consignor to institute a suit in the Calcutta Court only.

(2.) X x x x x x

(3.) X x x x x x