(1.) These appeals, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, are directed against the common order dated 10.08.2001 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati, in Claim Application Nos.787/1994, 788/1994, 789/1994, 791/1994, 792/1994, 793/1994 and 794/1994, rejecting the claim for refund of the excess freight charged from the appellants by the respondent railway for carriage of the goods booked by the appellants. Since all the claim applications were rejected by the common order and the common question of law is involved, the appeals are taken up together for hearing and disposal as agreed to by the learned counsel for the appearing parties.
(2.) The appellants filed the aforesaid claim applications before the Tribunal claiming refund of the freight contending inter alia that certain goods were booked for transportation by railway from one station to another, for which the freight was charged for a distance between the booking station and the destination station through the longer route, though carried in a shorter route and as such they are entitled to refund of the proportionate freight.
(3.) In CA Nos.787/1994, 788/1994, 789/1994, 791/1994, 792/1994, 793/1994, 794/1994 and 795/1994 the claim of the appellants before the Tribunal was for refund of the freight amounting to Rs.57,750/-, Rs.53,130/-, Rs.51,612/-, 59,145/-, Rs.48,576/-, Rs.48,576/-, Rs.48,576/- and Rs.48,576/-, respectively. The contention of the appellants was that the bamboo cuts were booked by different railway receipts on different dates for transportation by the railway from New Bongaigaon to Amlai, for which though the railway has charged the freight taking distance between the two stations as 1769 km via MLDT/ DKAE, which is a longer route, the goods were transported from New Bongaigaon to Amlai through a shorter route via Andal-AnaraChakradharpur covering the distance of 1510 km and as such they are entitled to refund of the excess freight charged by the railway for transportation of the aforesaid goods.