PURSHOTTAM DAS BANARSI DAS Vs. UNION OFINDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a first appeal, which has been filed by one of the defendants, namely, Messrs Purshottam Dass Banarsi Dass from the decision of the 1st Additional Civil Judge. Kanpur in Suit No. 187 of 1952 dated 3rd August 1956. The Union of India through the Deputy General Manager. Western Railway, filed this suit against Uarshad Rai Natwar Lal Rawal, the Bank of Baroda. Birhana Road, Kanpur, Shri Shiva Chandra Misra and M/s. Purshottam Dass Benarsidass defendants 1 to 4 respectively. Messrs Purshottam Dass Benarsi Dass have filed the present first appeal.

(2.) THE reliefs sought by the Union of India in the suit were that a decree be passed against defendant No. 4, the present appellant firm asking it to return the suit goods viz. 248 bags of Zeera and ordering it to pay compensation in respect of the fall in value by detention or otherwise consequent upon its wrongful retention, or alternatively that a decree be passed against defendant No. 4 that it should pay to the plaintiffs Rs. 38,000 with interest at six per pent from the date of the suit till realisation, or in the alterative a decree be passed against defendants Nos. 3 and 4 jointly and severally for Rs. 38,000 with six per cent interest from the date of the suit till realisation. There were certain other reliefs claimed by the plaintiffs but they are now no more relevant for the purposes of the first appeal.

(3.) THE plaintiffs immediately reported the incident to the Watch and Ward and the Government Railway Police authorities Immediate action was taken. Defendant No. 3 was contacted and interrogated and from mm, clues with regard to the consignment of 248 bags of white Zeera were found, and it became known that the said consignment was in the possession of defendant No. 4 and locked in their godown. The police seized the consignment in the godown of defendant No. 4. The cheats, however, could not be traced out by the police. At the instance of the Government Railway Police, the Railway Magistrate direct ed that the consignment be released in favour of the plaintiffs and that the defdt. No. 4 be directed to hand over the goods to the Railway authorities. Defendant No. 4 went in revision before the District Magistrate from the aforesaid order of the Railway Magistrate, who in his turn referred the matter Mo this Court. Hon'ble M.C. Desai, J. directed the police to retain the goods but did not decide the question of title to the same. Defendant No. 1 had been a party to the proceeding in this Court at Allahabad and was informed of the orders passed Defendant No. 1 instead of filing a suit against the other defendants, filed suit No. 38 of 1951 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Mehsana claiming Rs. 34,000 and costs and interest against the plaintiffs. The suit was contested by the plaintiffs of the instant case and a written statement was filed. It was then alleged that the plaintiffs were entitled to file the instant suit as the goods were wrongly removed from the lawful possession of the plaintiffs.