UNION OF INDIA Vs. MOTIRAM RATANCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit filed for realisation of a sum of Rs. 14.417.96 due to non-delivery of a consignment of 264 bags of wheat has been decreed by the learned Trial Court, though for Rs. 13,315.00 with proportionate cost. The consignment was booked from K.P. Dock, Calcutta on 5/8/66, and ought to have been delivered at Sibsagar by 5/9/66. As however, this was not done the suit as aforesaid was filed on 18/4/70. The booking of the consignment, and the non-delivery of the same are not in dispute. What has been agitated before this Court by the Defendant relates to issue No. 2 which was-"whether the suit was maintainable". Though the issue relates to the general ground of maintainability, what has been urged in this regard is the question of limitation. The only other point urged by Shri Duara is about the quantum of relief granted.

(2.) In so far as the limitation is concerned there is no dispute that it is Art. 11 of the limitation Act which is attracted, according to which a suit of the present nature is required to be filed within a period of 3 years from the date "the goods ought to be delivered". As even according to the plaintiff the goods ought to have been at Sibsagar by 5/9/66 as stated in their notice under Sec. 80 (Ext.9), and as the suit was filed on 18/4/70, the same was definitely beyond the period of limitation. But the learned Trial Court counted the period of limitation from 31/1/68 as by a letter written on that date (Ext.10) the Railways had purportedly acknowledged their liability. Thus benefit of Sec. 18 of the Limitation Act was made available to the plaintiff. Shri Duara has assailed this finding inasmuch as according to him Ext.10 cannot be read to be an acknowledgement at all.

(3.) To decide the controversy let us read the material portion of Ext.10.