UNION OF INDIA Vs. GANGARAM BHAGWANDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision by the defendant Union of India through the General managers, Central Railway and Western Railway from the judgment and decree dated December 13, 1971 by the Second Additional District Judge, Gwalior exercising the powers of a Small Court whereby the plaintiff non-petitioner's suit was decreed for Rs. 163. 33 P.

(2.) THE plaintiff's case is that nine bundles of tobacco were booked from Pedla railway Station on 20-3-1969 for delivery to the plaintiff at Gwalior Railway station. But all the 9 bundles of tobacco were found damaged when they were unloaded at Gwalior Railway Station. The plaintiff's allegation is that the tobacco was discoloured and had become wot on account of rains and moisture with the result that it became unfit for human consumption. It was pleaded that tobacco had been damaged on account of negligence and misconduct of the defendant Railway and its employees. Consequently, after serving notice under section 80, C. P. C. and Section 78 of the Railways Act the plaintiff filed the present suit for damages assessed at Rs. 504. 58 P. The defendant denied the plaintiff's claim and pleaded that the goods had not been damaged due to negligence and/or misconduct on the part of the Railway and its employees, it was also pleaded that the claim of the plaintiff had been settled fully and finally by payment of Rs. 283. 06 P. The plaintiff examined Shri Onkar Prasad in support of his case whereas the defendant did not produce any evidence. The lower court held that the tobacco was damaged due to the negligence and misconduct on the part of the defendant Railway. Consequently, after giving credit for Rs. 283. 05 P. paid by the defendant, it passed a decree for Rs. 163. 33 P.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has urged, in the first instance, that, vide certificate Ex. P-1 the defendant had remitted a cheque for Rupees 283. 05 p. in full and final settlement of the plaintiff's claim and, therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to get any more amount. In support of his contention the learned counsel has relied upon AIR 1963 SC 250.