SREENIWAS BASUDEO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred these appeals against the decisions of the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, rejecting a part of claim in each of the different applications. All the appeals, the controversy being circumscribed on common question of law and fact are proposed to be disposed of by this common judgment. The appeals have been filed for recovery of the amount as indicated below:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_605_GAULT1_2002Html1.htm</FRM>

(2.) The above claims in different applications have been rejected on the ground that the rice booked at the booking station was not weighed by the Railway staff and the weight indicated by the sender was accepted only for the purpose of calculation of freight. The learned Tribunal allowed only the cost of rice found short between the transshipment point and destination. The reasons given by the Tribunal are quoted herein below :

(3.) It would appear from the above that the Railway Authorities never accepted the weight indicated by the sender in the R.R. the forwarding note and the railway receipt indicate that the consignments were booked with the remark "said to contain". According to learned Tribunal, this remark is sufficient enough to conclude that the bags of rice were not weighed at the booking point. Therefore, the learned Tribunal relied upon the shortage found between the weighment done at the transhipment point and the destination point. In view of the above remark in the R.R., the Tribunal appears to have rightly rejected the claim of the appellant.