UNION OF INDIA Vs. JAIKUMAR RAJKUMAR AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, filed by the railway administration, represented through the appellant Union of India, challenges the judgment and decree dated 18. 10. 1985, whereby the claim of the respondent has been accepted to the extent of Rs. 12,250/-, towards loss occasioned to the respondent for delayed delivery of his goods consigned to the Railways for transport.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY, the plaintiff respondent had booked 120 quintals of batri pulses from Jabalpur to Shalimar on 19. 11. 1978. The goods were carried to Shalimar and were delivered to M/s. Shewlal Durga Prasad who was the endorsed consignee and commission agent for dealing in the goods on behalf of the respondent. According to the plaintiff, the normal period of transit of goods was ten days and the goods were delivered as late as on 14. 1. 1979 at Shalimar. By that time market price of the goods had considerably fallen down and the plaintiff was required to sell the goods at a lesser price. He thus suffered loss and claimed the same in the sum of Rs. 21,000/- being the difference of price of the goods at Jabalpur and Shalimar. The trial court accepted the case of the plaintiff that the normal period for transit of the goods is between ten to twelve days. On the basis of the evidence before it, the trial court determined the quantum of loss. The trial court held that on the date of delivery of the goods at Shalimar the rate of batri pulses had fallen down to Rs. 300/- per quintal and had the goods been delivered within a reasonable time often to fifteen days, it would have been sold at the rate of Rs. 400/- per quintal. The plaintiff is said to have suffered a loss at the rate of Rs. 100/- per quintal and for the total quantity of 122. 25 quintals, the trial court determined the loss at Rs. 12,250/- and decreed the suit for the aforesaid sum with costs.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the Railways first submitted that the claim towards loss due to fall in price of the commodity as a result of delay in transit is barred against the Railways under the provisions of Section 78 (d) read with Section 73 of the Indian Railways Act. It was submitted that under Section 73 of the Act, the Railways can be held responsible only for deterioration of the quality of goods, but not on account of loss of market or fall in price. The above argument set up on behalf of the Railways has been answered against the Railways in several decisions, including that of the Supreme Court, quoted below: