BHUPENDRA KUMAR Vs. INDIAN UNION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Rule against an order of the Small Cause Court Judge of Sealdah dismissing the -plaintiff's claim for Rs. 243 -4 -0 for compensation for non -delivery of a consignment of suit cases despatched from Sealdah on 3 -10 -1947 to Tezpur, Assam, a station served by the Tezpur Baliapara. Railway. The plaintiff has sued three defendants -the Indian Union representing the East Indian Railway, the same representing the Assam Railway and the Traffic Superintendent of the Tezpur Baliapara Railway, a company's railway. The learned Small Cause Court Judge has dismissed the claim on the ground that the plaintiff's agent at Tezpur on being informed of the arrival or discovery of the consignment refused to take delivery and that, therefore, he cannot maintain a suit for damages.

(2.) THE goods in question consisted of 14 small leather attach cases and 6 leather suit cases and according to the plaintiff they were arranged in seven packets some of the smaller cases being placed within the larger ones and the whole secured within a crate. Although the plaintiff alleges that the crate was strong and sound, nevertheless his agent in despatching the goods executed Risk Note A acknowledging defect in the packing. as well as Risk Note B. The learned Judge has also found, therefore, that the plaintiff is not entitled to any damages except on proof that the damages in the case was due to misconduct on the part of the Railway administration or their servants.

(3.) IN my opinion, the case is to be disposed of on this latter view. Evidently what happened was that owing to defective packing what arrived at Tezpur was a portion of the package and a portion of the consignment. There was some difficulty for sometime in ascertaining who was the consignee. Eventually, sufficient identification was made for information to be given to the plaintiff whose man went to the station and then was offered some six suit cases but refused to take delivery. It is proved that the package at any rate -shows the letters 'C.L.W.' identifying as a package of the plaintiff's firm, Chowdhury Leather Works.