UNION OF INDIA Vs. KALYANPUR CEMENT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Govind Saran, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri O.P. Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Shambhavi Nandan, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in rejecting the averments made in the affidavit filed by Sri J.N. Sinha. The rains were unexpected on both the occasions, however, adequate protection has been taken by the railways by providing Tarpaulin to the consignee to protect the consignment. However, the consignee was in hurry for unloading the goods. The goods should have been transported immediately through the Truck after unloading from the wagons, instead of unloading the goods at the side. He further submitted that the burden lies upon the respondent to prove the quantity of the damaged goods. Certificate issued by the Railway relating to quantity of the goods was not admissible and on the basis of said certificate, the compensation should not have been awarded by the Tribunal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent relied upon the judgment of the Tribunal and further referred a decision of the Learned Single Judge of this Court rendered in FAFO No. (450) of 1997, The Union of India v. M/s. Jai Dayal & Sons, which has been followed in another decision of the Learned Single Judge of this Court in FAFO (Defective) No. 451 of 1997, Union of India v. M/s. Jai Dayal & Co.