Y LOTHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. H.P. Barman, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. D.K. Dey, learned standing counsel for the respondent.

(2.) This appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is directed against the order dated 05.04.2012 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati in Claim Application No. OA-I/GHY/ 2009/0013 (New) as well as order dated 14.09.2012 passed by the said learned Tribunal in Review Application No. 31/2012. By the order dated 05.04.2012, the claim application was dismissed and by the order dated 14.09.2012, the review application was dismissed.

(3.) The appellant herein had booked a consignment of 1859 bags of iodized salt on 04.06.1996 under Invoice No. 74, Railway Receipt No. 821240 from Nawa City to Dimapur. On account of damage/ short-delivery of 570 packets of iodized salt, the appellant had lodged a claim at the rate of Rs.93.50 per bag. The claim petition was presented on 30.06.1999. However, during the pendency of the claim, the railway administration had sent a cheque for Rs.31,936/- together with an offer letter stating therein that it was as full and final payment. Without registering any protest, the said cheque was encashed. Accordingly, the respondents took a plea that the claim was not maintainable. The learned Tribunal framed two issues for trial, viz., (i) Whether the application is maintainable? and (2) Relief and costs? Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the claim application was dismissed on the ground that payment was accepted by the appellant herein without issuing any protest letter. The aggrieved appellant had filed a review application, but the same was dismissed on the ground that the case of Bhagwati Prasad Pawan Kumar Vs. Union of India, (2006) 5 SCC 311 was not applicable on the facts of the case.