UNION OF INDIA Vs. GUJRAT TOBACCO CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against a decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Burdwan in Small Cause Court Suit No. 134 of 1951 allowing in part the plaintiffs' claim for compensation against the defendant Railway. The claim arose out of damages alleged to have been caused to a part of a consignment of Biri tobacco booked at Station Vadtal for carriage and delivery to the plaintiffs at Burdwan. The booking was under Risk Notes A and B and the usual defences were taken by the petitioner Railway denying misconduct, claiming protection under the Risk Notes and alleging non-service of the statutory notices. It was further pleaded that the plaintiffs' claim was excessive and was also barred by limitation. The learned Subordinate Judge overruled the defence contentions and decreed the plaintiffs' suit. He, however, disallowed the plaintiffs' claim for interest. Against the decree passed as aforesaid, the defendant Railway obtained the present Rule.

(2.) In support of the Rule, Mr. Bhabesh Narayan Basu urged three points. He challenged the finding of the learned Subordinate Judge on the question of misconduct, contended also that there was no proper service of notice under Section 77, Railways Act and finally that the plaintiffs' suit was time-barred.

(3.) Upon the first point, Mr. Basu drew our attention particularly to the decision of this Court in the case of -- 'Ralliaram Dingra v. Governor-General of India in Council', AIR 1946 Cal 249 (A), and submitted that in the light of the observations contained in that judgment the learned Subordinate Judge's finding against the petitioner on the question of misconduct could not be sustained. On the above basis Mr. Basu claimed full protection for this client against the plaintiffs' claim, made in the suit, under the Risk Notes, referred to above.